Posted on 08/27/2008 10:52:16 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
DENVER - Democrats have made it a priority to lure more evangelical and Catholic voters from the Republican camp into their own, but the likelihood of success is becoming more problematic given pronouncements by two Catholic archbishops and a decision by the editor of an evangelical Christian magazine.
Most Rev. Charles J. Chaput, the archbishop of Denver, said Democratic vice presidential candidate Joseph Biden should avoid taking Communion because of his support for abortion rights.
In 2004, the Archbishop of Boston, Sean O'Malley stood by a statement he had made the previous year that pro-choice Catholics are in a state of grave sin and cannot take Communion properly. Around the same time, then-Cardinal (now Pope Benedict XVI) Joseph Ratzinger, in a private memorandum, told American bishops that Communion must be denied to Catholic politicians who support legal abortion. The memo and the statement by O'Malley were thought at the time to be directed at Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry, who is Catholic. Kerry and many other Democratic and Republican Catholic politicians have mostly ignored such directives and taken Communion anyway.
Appearing last Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi tried some theological hair-splitting. She described herself as "an ardent, practicing Catholic," but then said the church had only held its pro-life position for the last 50 years and that during the previous 2,000 years it had reached different conclusions about when life begins.
In an unusual public rebuke of a leading political figure, Washington, D.C., Archbishop Donald W. Wuerl said Pelosi was "incorrect" in her statement that the church had differed over the years about when live begins. Wuerl added, "We respect the right of elected officials such as Speaker Pelosi to address matters of public policy that are before them, but the interpretation of Catholic faith has rightfully been entrusted to the Catholic bishops. Given this responsibility to teach, it is important to make this correction for the record."
Wuerl said the Catechism of the Catholic Church has been clear for 2,000 years and he quoted from it: "Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. Š Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law."
Pelosi's office at first had no comment, but late Tuesday Pelosi's spokesman, Brendan Daly, issued a statement quoting the Speaker as saying she was raised in a "devout" Catholic home, but that "not all Catholics believe that life begins at conception." That comment is worse than the first. It makes Catholic teaching a matter of personal preference, not objective truth. This exposes the Democrats' "outreach" effort to "people of faith" - and you can pick whichever faith you like as long as you vote for Democrats - as a fraud and an attempt to add just one more interest group to the Democratic Party's constellation.
The third item of bad news for Democrats, who thought they could fool serious Catholics and evangelical Christians, may not have the impact of the previous two, but it reveals another crack in the foundation Democrats are trying to build in their party for religious voters. Cameron Strang, 32-year-old editor of the "edgy" and "hip" Relevant Magazine, pulled out of delivering the benediction on the Democratic National Convention's first night for fear it might be construed as an endorsement of Barack Obama.
Democrats have worked hard to bring more religious voters into their fold. As part of their strategy they have promoted a dubious and debatable doctrine that big government should be doing the work of God on Earth. But Democrats want to pick and choose what they like about God and what they don't (Republicans sometimes do this as well in such matters as wealth and materialism).
While government has a role in addressing certain issues that can be considered biblically-based (such as justice and poverty), Democrats see no role for government in helping to restrict sinful man when he wishes to kill the unborn, or allow - even promote - any and every relationship but traditional marriage.
It is in its failure to address these premier moral issues that the Democratic Party has unmasked itself as a party that cares less for God's agenda and more for its own, as it pursues the White House.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
The democrat party has quickly become the antithesis of Judeo-Christian values.
I am not quite sure how it's possible to practice these values while voting democrat.
He hit the nail right straight on the head.
Democrats sound so phony when they talk about anything related to religion.
For example, Howard Dean said that it’s not true that Democrats don’t have values. He said that Democrats have a lot in common with evangelicals. And he said that Democrat values are that they don’t think children should go to bed hungry at night.
Hillary Clinton has said that she’s always been a praying person. When asked the last time she went to church, she hemmed and hawed and said that doesn’t matter. Do you know of any person of faith who describes themselves as a “praying person” as Hillary did? She made that term up thinking it would fool somebody, apparently.
And they say “blessed are the peacemakers” and talk about how Jesus preached that we should help the poor . Which the big gov’t Democrats interpret to mean that we must create and expand social programs to “help the poor”.
But many people of faith volunteer and work through charities, and don’t expect or want the gov’t to be doing the work of “helping the poor”.
It is why they try to shift the argument to advancing socialism. But there is no “charity” in forced taxation to pay the dole out to the underclass.
And “universal healthcare” covers those who have money (they choose to spend on other things) as well as those without money.
They also have to attack the religious texts to suggest that same sex marriage IS morally acceptable.
They start with the agenda items and THEN seek to find justification for them instead of modelling policy on biblical teachings.
Ultimately if we “are” to fund our brothers’ health care because the bible instructs us to do so, then by the separation of Church and State, it CANNOT be government policy to do so. Not everyone follows that religion.
I do suppose that during the Primaries Hillary was PRAYING like never before ("Let me win! Oh PLEASE let me win...")
It is time for the Atheistic/Socialist party(Democrats) to come on out of the closet and admit they hate Bible believing Christians. But of Satan's many pawns(useful idiots) most don't believe he exists, and the others are deceivers like their master who is deceiving them. Hollywood is full of folks who don't realize they're the devil's tools.
There is a hot spot in hell reserved for some of the fake "Reverends" we've got mugging for the cameras at every political event.
When you mix religion and an election(popularity contest), you get a nasty brew of watered down hypocrisy that flows from the mouths of compromising souls in the form of sugary sound-bites.
Yes, Cal hits a huge homerun with this column.
Try to think of it as a "Political abortion".
There, that's better.
I really hope that people are “smartening” up when they try to connect the “ardent” catholic pelosi with any kind of faith in Christ.
There. I completed that for her.
......”It is why they try to shift the argument to advancing socialism. But there is no “charity” in forced taxation to pay the dole out to the underclass......”
I have felt for many years that the Democrats’ biggest sin is the denigration of true charity by seeking to impose big government programs to “help the poor”. Nothing kills true charity faster than the government confiscating all the wealth in order to redistribute it according to their wishes. This sort of philosophy kills the human spirit.
Los”ing”?
A. Only half the congregation is 'kneeling'.
Cheers!
Cal don’t always hit ‘em outa the park for every Christian. He complains that Pelosi’s when-life-begins weasel-wording “makes Catholic teaching a matter of personal preference, not objective truth.” But isn’t much of Catholic teaching, like the priest’s mandatory celibacy, a matter of ordained pronouncement and tradition or purported divine revelation?
On CNN, Michelle Obama was talking about how she would talk to her husband about people in debt. Yet her solution was to work out government policies, NOT increase their own contributions to charity.
But there is no “charity” in forced taxation to pay the dole out to the underclass.
Socialists think that charity begins and ends at the voting booth.Vote for me, and you won't have to give at the office. In fact you can criticize Republicans who tithe as being cheap.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.