Posted on 03/01/2006 12:13:09 PM PST by Mrs. Don-o
Still reeling from the attacks on Sen. John F. Kerry's brand of Roman Catholicism during the 2004 presidential race, 55 House Democrats issued a joint statement yesterday on the central role that the Catholic faith plays in their public lives.
The signers said they were fed up with being labeled "good Catholics" or "bad Catholics" based on one issue -- abortion. They said their religion infuses their positions on many issues: poverty, war, health care and education.
"Some of us are pro-choice and some of us are pro-life," said Rep. William J. Pascrell Jr. (D-N.J.). "But we respect each other and we're going to defend each other, because we're all operating in good conscience."
...But Tom McClusky, a Catholic who is acting vice president for government affairs at the Family Research Council, predicted they would fail.
"What is at the core of being Catholic is the life issue, and that's something the pope has never strayed from," he said. "While other issues are important -- such as helping the poor, the death penalty, views on war -- these are things that aren't tenets of the Catholic Church."
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
If DeLauro is Catholic, then I'm the Pope.
Well, in my view (and I'm not Catholic) the only way to be a "good Catholic" is to follow the Pope's teachings. And since the Pope isn't changing his mind on the subject of the unborn...
Basically, there would be a certain equivalence between life-and-death issues IF it was a question of directly, deliberately, and unjustly killing people, i.e. murder. If somebody advocated shooting the welfare recipients, or gassing the homeless, or nuking civilians in Iraq, THAT would be the equivalent of abortion: cold-blooded murder.
But that's not the case. In the issues of poverty, etc.we have a range of prudential judgments about how best to deal with it. In the case abortion, you've got a straight-up-and-down moral prohibition (the prohibition against directly, deliberately destroying the life of a noncombatant or nonaggressor.)
Actually, Bernardin did eventually do a better job of making that distinction. But he was never so clear, so forceful, or so persistent as to effectively challenge this liberal-Democrat assumption of false equivalency.
We have many who have condemned this stance repeatedly.
Where have you been?
It is not only the abortion issue: they are no help on Catholic education or on protecting the family.
What was that Kerry said about strangling the next Republicans with his rosary beads????
"If I'm the nominee, Republicans will be sorry," said Biden, a Roman Catholic who ran for president in 1988. "The next Republican that tells me I'm not religious I'm going to shove my rosary beads down their throat."
I guess my key word would be "strong," meaning not "forceful" (or even "right") but POWERFUL and INFLUENTIAL. I think a strong statement of condemnation from one of the cardinals--like the new one in Boston, for instance--would at least get their attention. As it is, the direct attacks on the pro-abort politicians have been written off as the work of churchmen who are marginal to the mainstream of American Catholicism--and who do not have the ear of the Vatican.
I concur. Catholicism, indeed Christianity, is indivisible from being pro-life.
"If I ever remember where the heck I left them."
AMEN!
Being Pro- choice shows that the tenets of the Catholic Religion do not infuse 0ne or affect one's actions or positions at all. Such a person elects what to believe and will use whatever he can of words from the Faith to support that which he chooses in the first place with no reference to the Faith. He is purely excercising Private Judgment which is not in any way Catholic.
Their conscience is good because they believe that they have the duty of instructing God because God sometimes doesn't understand the reality of Modern Times.
Catholic World News' take on this:
Catholic Democrats assert "primacy of conscience" over Church teaching
Washington, Mar. 01 (CWNews.com) - A group of Catholic members of the US House of Representatives has issued a "Statement of Principles" in which they claim a "commitment to the basic principles at the heart of Catholic social teaching," but refuse to accept the Church's opposition to legal abortion.
The "Statement of Principles" was released on February 28, and signed by 55 of the 72 Catholic Democrats in the House of Representatives. The group professes its commitment to carrying out Catholic social teaching in many ways: "reducing the rising rates of poverty; increasing access to education for all; pressing for increased access to health care; and taking seriously the decision to go to war."
The Democratic group goes on to acknowledge "the undesirability of abortion-- we do not celebrate its practice." But the statement says that although they recognize the Church's teaching authority the lawmakers "believe also in the primacy of conscience." Acknowledging the "tension that comes with being in disagreement with the Church in some areas," the legislators leave it clear (if not explicitly stated) that they will not attempt to end legal abortion.
The "Statement of Principle" does not mention other controversial issues on which Democratic lawmakers have often clashed with Church teachings, such as euthanasia, embryonic research, and government recognition of same-sex unions.
The statement was issued from the office of Connecticut's Rep. Rosa DeLauro. The others signing the statement were:
1. Joe Baca
2. Xavier Becerra
3. Robert Brady
4. Michael Capuano
5. Dennis A. Cardoza
6. Wm. Lacy Clay
7. Jim Costa
8. Joseph Crowley
9. Peter A. DeFazio
10. William Delahunt
11. Rosa DeLauro
12. Mike Doyle
13. Anna Eshoo
14. Lane Evans
15. Charles A. Gonzalez
16. Raul M. Grijalva
17. Luis V. Gutierrez
18. Maurice Hinchey
19. Tim Holden
20. Patrick J. Kennedy
21. Dale E. Kildee
22. James R. Langevin
23. John B. Larson
24. Stephen Lynch
25. Edward J. Markey
26. Jim Marshall
27. Carolyn McCarthy
28. Betty McCollum
29. James P. McGovern
30. Cynthia McKinney
31. Marty Meehan
32. Michael H. Michaud
33. George Miller
34. James P. Moran
35. Grace Napolitano
36. Richard E. Neal
37. James L. Oberstar
38. David R. Obey
39. Frank Pallone
40. Bill Pascrell
41. Ed Pastor
42. Nancy Pelosi
43. Silvestre Reyes
44. Lucille Roybal-Allard
45. Tim Ryan
46. John T. Salazar
47. Linda T. Sanchez
48. Loretta Sanchez
49. Jose Serrano
50. Hilda L. Solis
51. Bart Stupak
52. Gene Taylor
53. Mike Thompson
54. Nydia Velazquez
55. Diane Watson
"What this statement needs is just one strong Church leader to come out and condemn it for the pile of crap that it is. Do we have such a leader among the US Catholic bishops? I doubt it."
I doubt it,too. Most Catholic bishops are liberal Democrats at heart.
Actually the Dems are not spot on for helping the poor. They are for taking money from other people to help the poor. Or to be more honest to build more programs to hire more social workers to develop more programs to hire more social workers and on and on and on. In non government life this is called stealing. And no matter how noble is not considered justified.
Private charity is a tenant of Catholic faith but no right is as central and as essential as teaching on the right to life. All other tenants of the faith stem from that principle.
Dear XXXXXXX,
Thank you for your e-mail. I’ve read the statement by the Catholic Democratic members of the U.S. House of Representatives and it is of great concern.
I’ll develop some way of responding to this. Thank you letting me know your thoughts.
May the Lord give you peace.
+cjc
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.