Catholic voters must "limit evil" with their vote, Kansas City bishops say

CNA ^

[flyfree]

While Catholics can disagree about the best policies and the most effective candidates related to such issues, the bishops insisted:

“Catholics have an obligation to study, reflect and pray over the relative merits of the different policy approaches proposed by candidates. Catholics have a special responsibility to be well informed regarding the guidance given by the Church pertaining to the moral dimensions of these matters.”

Archbishop Naumann and Bishop Finn then noted what issues can never be justified, which they said included: “legalized abortion, the promotion of same-sex unions and ‘marriages,’ repression of religious liberty, as well as public policies permitting euthanasia, racial discrimination or destructive human embryonic stem cell research.”

“To vote for a candidate who supports these intrinsic evils because he or she supports these evils is to participate in a grave moral evil. It can never be justified.”

The bishops wrote that any Catholic who deliberately votes for a candidate “precisely because of the candidate’s permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia” would be guilty of “formal cooperation” in evil and should not present himself or herself for communion.

When it comes to issues of intrinsic evil, a properly-formed conscience “must give such issues priority even over other matters with important moral dimensions,” they explained.

In an ideal situation, there would be a choice between two candidates who both fully oppose policies that involve intrinsic evils.

However, when both candidates advocate policies that support intrinsic evils, the bishops wrote, “the appropriate judgment would be to select the candidate whose policies regarding this grave evil will do less harm. We have a responsibility to limit evil if it is not possible at the moment to eradicate it completely. ”

According to the bishops, a voter would have “insufficient moral justification” voting for a more permissive candidate, but could justifiably vote for a write-in candidate or abstain from voting at all in such a case because of a “conscientious objection.”

Explaining that “remote material cooperation” by voting for a candidate who supports intrinsic evils is permissible for “proportionate reasons,” Archbishop Naumann and Bishop Finn questioned whether consideration for a candidate’s position on prudential issues could outweigh considerations regarding the candidate’s support for intrinsic evils.

“What could possibly be a proportionate reason for the more than 45 million children killed by abortion in the past 35 years?” they asked. “Personally, we cannot conceive of such a proportionate reason.” Claiming that Catholic influence has “never been greater” in U.S. politics, the bishops cautioned: “It would be wrong for us to use our numbers and influence to try to compel others to accept our religious and theological beliefs.”

However, they add, “it would be equally wrong for us to fail to be engaged in the greatest human rights struggle of our time, namely the need to protect the right to life of the weakest and most vulnerable.”

Lamenting Catholic dissent in public life, they wrote: “It is particularly disturbing to witness the spectacle of Catholics in public life vocally upset with the Church for teaching what it has always taught on these moral issues for 2,000 years, but silent in objecting to the embrace, by either political party, of the cultural trends of the past few decades that are totally inconsistent with our nation’s history of defending the weakest and most vulnerable.”

Concluding their statement, the bishops called for committed Catholics in both major political parties to insist upon respect for human life, support for the institution of marriage between a man and a woman, and religious liberty.

[Salvation]

I think we will see more and more Bishops come out against the abortion plank of the dimocrat platform, Biden, Pelosi, et al.

Updated: American Bishops who have spoken against Pelosi

Here is the complete list of American bishops who have responded to Nancy Pelosi's comments so far:

1. Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver was the first American bishop to respond
2. ... Bishop James Conley, his auxiliary, joined him
3. Archbishop Donald Wuerl of Washington DC responded twice, first in a press release and second in a statement to The Hill. He has also appeared on Fox News, I am told.
4. Cardinal Justin Regali of Philadelphia, chairman of the Committee on Pro-Life Activities, issued this statement through the USCCB website...
5. ... Bishop William Lori of Bridgeport, chairman of the Committee on Doctrine, joined him
6. Cardinal Edward Egan of New York publised a strongly worded statement of his own
7. Bishop Samuel Aquila of Fargo issued a letter correcting Pelosi's claims
8. Bishop David Zubik of Pittsburgh and...
9. ... Bishop Michael Sheridan of Colorado Springs have chimed-in
10. Archbishop Jose Gomez of San Antonio, CNA reports has added his voice ...
11. ... Bishop Oscar Cantu, his auxiliary bishop, has joined him
12. Bishop William Murphy of Rockville has published an extensive letter
13. Bishop Edward Slattery of Tulsa has a detailed response
14. Bishop Kevin Farrell of Dallas has joined the USCCB's efforts
15. Bishop Gregory Aymond of Austin is on-board
16. Cardinal Sean O'Malley of Boston mentions the USCCB on his blog
17. Bishop Thomas Wenski of Orlando has written at length
18. Archbishop John Nienstedt of Saint Paul/Minneapolis challenges Pelosi's statement
19. Cardinal Francis George of Chicago, President of the US Bishops, has weighed-in
20. Bishop Robert Vasa of Baker, OR publishes in the Catholic Sentinel
21. Bishop Jerome Listecki of La Crosse, WI responds in a word document
22. Bishop Richard Lennon of Cleveland, OH will comment in his September 5th column (PDF)
23. Bishop Ralph Nickless of Sioux City, IA has one of the very best responses I've read
24. Archbishop George Niederauer of San Francisco has invited Pelosi to a "conversation"
25. Bishop Glen Provost, LA: "Catholic Church clear on when human life begins"
26. Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio of Brooklyn: "Judging the Candidates"

{Last updated on September 10th.}

Notes:

• Previous #23 has been removed. Bishop Joseph Gossman of Raleigh, NC is actually the bishop emeritus, and the new bishop, Michael Burbidge has not, to my knowledge, made a personal statement.
• Previous #16 has also been removed, it was an erroneous duplication of current #13.
• #26 was added September 10th, although he published his column September 6th

[Salvation]

New video from CatholicVote.com

Powerful
http://www.creativeminorityreport.com/2008/09/new-video-from-catholicvotecom.html

[Mercat]

I read it. My brother who lives on the Missouri side, is a yellow dog democrat prolife Catholic. I know. Difficult to understand. But assuming he reads this joint pastoral letter, he and his wife will cling to this phrase from Benedict: “When a Cathlic does not share a candidate’s stand in favor of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remove material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presense of proportionate reasons.” To the extent I understand that sentence at all, I know that my brother believes that Republicans are so evil that this alone is sufficient reason to vote against them no matter what the policy of the democrat is re: abortion or anything else.

[Camel Joe]

Incredible video, too bad my own diocese has kept silent. They seem to have no regard for Rome or the Holy Father.

[G.Mason]

The enemy Marxist Socialist Democrat Party & the MSM will be talking in tongues over their mythological take on the separation of church and state clause in the first Ammendment to the United States Constitution.

Yes ... a very interesting election cycle indeed.

[narses]

Obama Doesn’t Want His Daughters Punished with a Baby

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNzmly28Bmg

CNN on Obama’s Infant Born Alive Act Rejection

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPZCXcTwZPY

Jill Stanek on Obama and Born Alive Infant Protection Act (MUST SEE)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIdbYjmbFzo

Obama Cover-up Revealed On Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Bill

http://www.nrlc.org/ObamaBAIPA/ObamaCoverup.html

Explosive Audio Found Obama arguing against BAIPA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypDwNpgIUQc

Babies left to die!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIdbYjmbFzo

[narses]

Obama Says A Baby Is A Punishment

Obama: “If they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”

[narses]

+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.

Obama Says A Baby Is A Punishment

Obama: “If they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”

[flyfree]

Here is the YouTube page, it could use some freeping:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqzMB-gA6Ro

[Campion]

To the extent I understand that sentence at all, I know that my brother believes that Republicans are so evil that this alone is sufficient reason to vote against them no matter what the policy of the democrat is re: abortion or anything else.

"remote material cooperation" -- doing something that is not evil in itself, but is twisted or misused by someone else to serve evil, outside of your control.

"the presence of proportionate reasons" -- In other words, you could vote for a pro-abort candidate if the other candidate is correspondingly worse.

But the "worse" has to be proportionately and correspondingly worse than permitting, excusing, and in some cases enabling the deliberate murder of 4,000 innocent kids a day.

What would your brother say Republicans would do that would be proportionately worse than that? "Republicans are evil" doesn't cut it. They have to be indisputably more evil than supporting 4000 murders a day.

[Cicero]

Kansas bishops need to say something about Kathleen Sebelius and her cozy relationship with Killer Tiller, possibly the worst abortionist in the whole country.

[The Sons of Liberty]

Hussein 0bama, a muslim and supporter of infanticide, is going straight to hell - why would anyone want to support him and go along for the ride?

[MSSC6644]

Archbishop Naumann has: http://www.catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=28921

[a02001]

A couple weeks ago, our parish priest took Nancy to the woodshed and I learned a little history. In my opinion well worth the read :-)

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NTY1MzAwOTc5MmViMzUyYzM5YmY3OWFkYzdkMzY0YzM=

“Unfortunately, or providentially, their hands were forced. They had to react to the public remarks made by a Catholic Politician,Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, as she publicly defended abortion on “Meet the Press” last
Sunday. She argued “over the history of the church, this is an issue of controversy.” and disingenuously sought to defend herself by twisting the teaching of the greatest theologian in the history of the Church, St.
Augustine. For the record, and summarizing the bishops’ responses: this is a load of bunk.”

The second
link is by a lawyer (no less) supporting the sermon.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NDc4MmU1Y2E3YjMyNzdiNGI1ZDFhOTNmMTI4OWQyNDM=

“It took a simple parish priest, however, to say it most eloquently. This weekend, Fr. John De Celles, an associate pastor at Old St. Mary’s Church in Alexandria, Va., delivered a homily squarely confronting Pelosi and her
thinking, but put the debate an interesting historical context.”

[Ann Archy]

THANK GOD!!!

[pray4liberty]

Unfortunately my sister thinks like your brother. Telling her that she will have to answer to God for her pro-abortion votes is a waste of time. I've sure tried and she thinks I'm the crazy fundamentalist.

I can only pray someone else will point out the error of her ways to her...hopefully her priest!

[pray4liberty]

Send him this: Voters Guide to Serious Catholics

It's worth a shot.

[a02001]

Stick to the facts- when you go off the deep end and claim he is a muzzy, your mud slinging makes the rest of us Conservatives look like wing-nuts. We will not defeat this abortion ticket by claiming stuff that is off the wall. Stick to the real facts, otherwise your point is not made to those in the center who will decide this election. I don't care if he is a muzzy or a daily mass goer, he follows a path to destruction. So stop being a wing-nut, please

[The Sons of Liberty]

First. If you attend a madrassa and declare yourself a muslim, which 0bama did, then I must assume you're a muslim.

Second. Bite me, if you don't like it.