Posted on 05/20/2004 6:19:23 AM PDT by NYer
Edited on 05/20/2004 8:46:00 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
Forty-eight Roman Catholic members of Congress have warned in a letter to Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick of Washington that U.S. bishops will revive anti-Catholic bigotry and severely harm the church if they deny Communion to politicians who support abortion rights.The letter's signers, all Democrats, include at least three House members with strong antiabortion voting records.
"For many years Catholics were denied public office by voters who feared that they would take direction from the Pope," they wrote. ". . . While that type of paranoid anti-Catholicism seems to be a thing of the past, attempts by Church leaders today to influence votes by the threat of withholding a sacrament will revive latent anti-Catholic prejudice, which so many of us have worked so hard to overcome."
The three-page letter, dated May 10, was sent to McCarrick because he heads a task force of U.S. bishops that is considering whether, and how, the church should take action against Catholic politicians whose public positions are at odds with Catholic doctrine.
McCarrick's spokesman, Susan Gibbs, said he would not comment on the letter. She said the seven-member task force is "listening to many different voices" and will grant the 48 House members' request for a meeting. "They will be heard. It just hasn't been arranged yet," she said.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
Charlie Stenholm of Texas is pro-life, as is Bart Stupak (see another posted article on this very subject, where Stupak says that bishops have refused to shake his hand merely because he's a Democrat).
I would never vote for a Democrat, but just read down the thread.
There's a logical next step in this process, which is to declare that it is mortally sinful to belong to the Democrat Party, since it includes a pro-choice platform in its policies.
Do you think that's where the Church ought to go? Will that win the hearts and minds of Americans in the effort to curb abortion?
If that so-called "pro-life" Democrat KNOWS what that party stands for, namely aborttion, and he willfully and willingly goes along with it KNOWING this, regardless, that's different, right? Maybe the concept of "near occasions of sin" has left the Church after all.
This conflation of issues has been a reliable excuse for the Bishops since Cardinal Bernardin, an enemy of Right Order and the Roman Catholic Church, invented it in the mid-1980's (?)
It's called "the Seamless Garment" and the representation of the USCC flunkies is that 'life is life--no executions, no abortions.'
Well, you called precisely the problem with that little spin-job: there's a real difference between Al Capone and an unborn baby.
Could be. Depends on what one's intentions are. Is that what you're really worried about? That the pro-abort Republicans are also gonna get called on the carpet? They should be.
There are zero Democratic pro-life Catholic congressmen. I think they are counting people like Nancy Landrieu as pro-lifers. The only pro-life Democrats are a dwindling number of southern conservatives. Denise Kookysnitch (D-Jupiter, OH) was one of the last. He's now a pro-babyslaughter Bhuddist.
The Bishops do not need a "reservoir of good will" to make appropriate moral decisions on this issue. They only need gonads and a copy of the Canon Law.
Sheridan, by the way, has already foregone a $100K contribution from a (surprise) Democrat lawyer, who is a disciple of Dick Lamm, arguably the Heinrich Himmler of pro-abort ex-Governors.
As Sheridan's spokesman said: too bad. We started with no money, and money is not our objective. We are here to save souls.
They are just as sinful as the "pro-life" Democtats who remain in the party. Regardless of their party affiliation, being pro-DEATH under any stripe is still a sin. It means that any GOP member who is staunchly pro-Life should refrain from financial support of the pro-death candidates. Giving to the party is not the same thing.
No. But, logically, you and I will also get called on the carpet for supporting a party that allows pro-abortion politicians into its tent.
The bishops need to tread carefully lest they bring about more of what they're trying to stop.
(((((((((((((((((((PING)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Excommunicating pro-abortion and pro-capital punishment politicians would certainly be a quantum leap up from the position we're now in.
Or, anyway, will no one rid me of these turbulent pests?
>> Yes I do. Of course a pro-lifer does not sin by belonging to the Democrat Party.<<
I wouldn't favor the bishops denying communion based on this, but I would say that given the pro-babyslaughter litmus tests applied by the Democratic party for even influential intraparty positions, a pro-lifer does commit mortal sin by voting for pro-babyslaughter candidates (like "Catholics" Daschle, Pelosi) for congressional leadership posts.
That's NOT a logical step, as you well know--but it enhances your rhetorical attack on the few good men who have made life uncomfortable for the pols.
How is it different? Your money, being fungible, might end up in the campaign of one of these candidates. Dare you risk that?
The pharmacist on the corner might also be pro-choice. Should you do business with his pharmacy?
The RepublicRATs in the ranks of the Republican Party are bad enough, but DemocRATs are all bad! There is not one...including Zell Miller...who truly espouses conservative values and votes conservatively!
On what do you base this assertion?
It would be a grave sin for me. I know that.
>>And the Republican Party welcomes them. Does that mean that giving financial support to the GOP is "abhorrent to God?"<<
No... the Republican Party does not force its members to be Pro-babyslaughter in order to hold leadership positions. The GOP is neutral on abortion; the Dem Party demands pro-babyslaughter politicans or else.
We should be, to the extent that we acquiesce to pro-abort sentiment in the party.
But, like I said, it does have a lot to do with intention. One can belong to the Democrat party in good conscience, if the purpose in so doing is to turn the party away from its pro-abortion ways. The same would apply in the Republican party.
I think you are overreacting to some things that Bp. Sheridan didn't say, and you are assuming things that are unwarranted, IMO.
I think Karl Keating's Voter's Guide for Serious Catholics deals with all this in a way that few, if any, bishops would have a problem with.
OK...well, maybe Cdl. Mahony. But, that almost goes without saying.
No they don't. But they do need moral credibility to be listened to, by their priests and people.
They don't have it.
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.