As a practicing Catholic, I have to applaud Archbishop's Chaput's speaking out on this subject. I would add though, I would go a step further: Catholics that twist doctrine to support this pro-abortion candidate Obama are not only wrong, but hypocrites. Obama supports abortion in the last trimester, and advocates killing the baby even if it is born alive. Obama's views are so heinous that any Catholic that knows this and still supports him should be excommunicated. We are better off without you.
Update: Ok. Excommunication is extreme. Consistent with Catholic doctrine, they can be denied communion.
Thank you for reading this blog.
8 comments:
What if I, as a catholic, can't support someone who aproved the war on Iraq and is pro-death penalty?
I've never been able to understand why do conservative chsristians (catholics or not) call themselves "pro-life" and –at the same time– support killing criminals in the name of justice.
Catholics are a rather diverse lot, but to be Catholic is not up to interpretation, as the church in it's right decides what the doctrine is. It is not a democratic process. If you are against war, that is consistent as a Catholic, and if you are against the death penalty, that is consistent as well. According to my sources, Pro-Life at the very top of its hierarchy is to be 100% against abortion. There can be no other way in the Church's eyes and no balance to between allowing abortion and being against the other transgressions. My point is, is that you can think any of these things, but to do anything other than Catholic doctrine does not mean you are not following it and therefore not a good Catholic. Further, I am not judging people so much as I am bringing up the question, what makes a good member of any orthodoxical movement or religion? Movement's and religions are entitled to make their rules. If we do not agree with them, then may be it is time to move on, no? Honestly, there are times I'd rather just say I am and leave it at that. :) My only truck with the church, other than how it handles the molestation BS, is that priests should be allowed to marry, but then again, I used to be Anglican.
In essence though, you support changing our constitution to reflect your own personal religious views?
I think the catholic hierarchy (hope spelled it correctly) has given a lot of attention to the abrotion issue, leaving behind some other issues that are, also, important (enviromental damage, child molestation, war, torture, death row, poverty).
I don't think being a good catholic means sticking up to the actual doctrine, as it changes over time (we had a limbo 4 years ago, now it's gone!). As a jesuit-schooled catholic, I've been taught that being a good catholic is living the Gospel and staying true to Christ's teachings, not blindly support the current Pope. As we have discussed in other posts, a good catholic may think that the best way to minimize abortions is to prevent unplanned pregancies, not prohibiting it. a good catholic may think (as it is true in some parts of the world, and the USA) that illegal abortions are highly dangerous for the woman, and, so, would rather make abortion legal, to minimize damages. However, a good catholic would NEVER encourage a woman to have an abortion, but rather promote adoption.
I think the Church's battle against abortion is on the wrong front: we shouldn't be trying to impose OUR view to others, we should be promoting alternatives to abortions.
Any changes to the constitution I support would only be to protect individual rights.
Hector:
You bring up a good point. Traditional Catholicism has taught to follow doctrine. It has changed somewhat, and may be more so in latin american countries where liberation theology is more popular. It has changed in that they are moving towards a more personal relationship with Jesus and a gospel focused approach. This isn't what I grew up with, but I agree it is moving towards that. That being said, ultimately, Jesus gives us 3 commandments in his covenant: Love your god with all you heart, all your soul and all your mind, Honor thy mother and thy father, and love one another as I have loved you or put in more modern context, do unto others as you would have done unto you. Simple concepts, yet the most difficult to follow. As far as abortion goes, it's a unique circumstance in nature that a human caries a baby and has the ability to abort it. It's not as if humans lay eggs and the instance of another human is a separate entity from the mother. The challenge is, how do you support the right of life of an individual against the dominion of another person's body? It's a difficult philosophical question, don't you think? My argument is not that I wish to jam my views down people's throats, and pass laws regarding this, but rather change their hearts and consider the alternatives. What pisses me off about Obama is his adamancy with abortion up to the 9th month. It's not that he is pro-choice, but in my mind pro-abortion. His insistence that it is "above his pay grade" shows his unwillingness to discuss the issue genuinely and truthfully, probably because his views would be out of sync even with some pro-choice individuals.
I have the impression that Obama opposed an iniciative to ban late-time abortions because it did not include a key exception: if the mother's life is in danger (which, as far as I know, not even the Catholic Church officialy opposes).
But, of course, I could be wrong about that...
Hector, go here as it explains it in detail I don't have the time for right now: http://rsmccain.blogspot.com/2008/10/video-planned-infanticide.html
Post a Comment