Can a Catholic be pro-choice? Catholic teaching...

[JacktheCatholic]

Let me start with a quote on Catholic teaching:

In his 1995 Encyclical Letter Evangelium Vitae ("The Gospel of Life" no. 62) Pope John Paul II taught that "direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or a means, always constitutes a grave moral disorder, since it is the deliberate killing of an innocent human being. This doctrine is based upon the natural law and upon the written Word of God, [as] transmitted by the Church's Tradition and taught by the ordinary and universal Magisterium." This teaching, he says, was implicit in Sacred Scripture, whose many texts "show such great respect for the human being in the mother's womb that they require as a logical consequence that God's commandment `You shall not kill' be extended to the unborn child as well" (no. 61). Moreover, since the earliest days of Christianity, the Church taught the evil of abortion and infanticide, widely practiced in the Greco-Roman world of that time.

The clear and unanimous tradition of the Church has only in recent decades been challenged in practice. In order to preclude confusion among Catholics, Pope Paul VI had already declared this tradition "unchanged and unchangeable." Pope John Paul II, after consultation among the bishops of the world, declared on his apostolic authority in Evangelium Vitae that this moral doctrine was part of the patrimony of faith taught infallibly by the universal ordinary Magisterium of the Church, i.e., the College of Bishops united in their teaching throughout history and throughout the world.

A Catholic, to be in full communion with the faith of the Church, must accept this teaching about the evil of abortion and euthanasia. The Encyclical Letter Evangelium Vitae, with reference to judicial decisions or civil laws that authorize or promote abortion or euthanasia, states that there is "a grave and clear obligation to oppose them by conscientious objection" (no. 73). Moreover, it says that "in the case of an intrinsically unjust law, such as a law permitting abortion or euthanasia, it is never licit to obey it, or to take part in a propaganda campaign in favor of it, or vote for it."

Source: Theological Reflections on Catholics in Political Life and the Reception of Holy Communion

 

[JacktheCatholic]

From same source;

Over the years since the 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision, the frustration of many Catholics, bishops among them, about Catholic politicians who not only ignore Church teaching on abortion but actively espouse a contrary position has continued to grow. Within the past year a few bishops have publicly called upon such politicians to refrain from receiving Holy Communion; one has invoked Church canon law to impose a penalty restricting several Catholic legislators from receiving Holy Communion until they have publicly changed their pro-abortion (pro-choice) positions.

And let me hight light from the first quote:

A Catholic, to be in full communion with the faith of the Church, must accept this teaching about the evil of abortion and euthanasia. The Encyclical Letter Evangelium Vitae, with reference to judicial decisions or civil laws that authorize or promote abortion or euthanasia, states that there is "a grave and clear obligation to oppose them by conscientious objection" (no. 73). Moreover, it says that "in the case of an intrinsically unjust law, such as a law permitting abortion or euthanasia, it is never licit to obey it, or to take part in a propaganda campaign in favor of it, or vote for it."

It is clear from this document from the Bishops in the U.S. of A. that "Pro-Choice" is a veil for "Pro-Abotion" and that to vote in full knowledge of this, as a Catholic, would remove them from full communion.

Any one contest this? I would not think so since this is quite clear and unmistakingly to the point.

No one with a well defined conscience can vote "pro-choice", so says our Bishops in the USA.

 

[SpiritualAntiseptic]

Are you talking about voting for a candidate or party which has a pro-choice stance? That is permissible assuming that the person voting is not doing it to implement pro-choices policies, but because they believe that what the party supports and can accomplish serves the common good more than the other party, despite their pro-choice policies.

If a state/nation put the issue up to a vote, then I do not see how it could ever be permissible for a Catholic to vote in support of making abortion legal. It would take quite a stretch to say that society is better off with abortion legal.

When it comes to a politician, he cannot support pro-choice policies unless it is part of a compromise that he believes will help society more, despite the pro-choice part.

I suppose he or she could say that he would support a pro-choice policy in order to stay elected which would help society more than his potential opponents. In other words, being part of a pro-choice party that he knows will always win elections, so he feels it is better if he is elected. However, unlike some of our politicians, a Catholic should never separate his personal morality from his political views.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

I cannot post the entirety of the link I quoted but if you read through it you would find that it addressed your argument and stated abortion and euthanasia take presedent and are unique to all other social welfare ithems that one may arue when voting pro-choice.

To keep it simple, "no Catholic can vote 'pro-choice' in full knowledge of what I posted and still be in full communion." They will be gravely sinning and supporting these very grave evils. It is a "no brainer", a Catholic is not able to vote pro-choice while having the full knowledge of the Bishops stance in the USA as well as that of the Vatican.

To go out and choose a pro-choice candidate is to support abortion. Simpla as that. The article I linked makes it so simple as to state you cannot vote for such a candidate. So, it really cannot get any simpler than that. This is 8th reading stuff and everyone here should be able to understand it fine.

Are you talking about voting for a candidate or party which has a pro-choice stance? That is permissible assuming that the person voting is not doing it to implement pro-choices policies, but because they believe that what the party supports and can accomplish serves the common good more than the other party, despite their pro-choice policies.

If a state/nation put the issue up to a vote, then I do not see how it could ever be permissible for a Catholic to vote in support of making abortion legal. It would take quite a stretch to say that society is better off with abortion legal.

When it comes to a politician, he cannot support pro-choice policies unless it is part of a compromise that he believes will help society more, despite the pro-choice part.

I suppose he or she could say that he would support a pro-choice policy in order to stay elected which would help society more than his potential opponents. In other words, being part of a pro-choice party that he knows will always win elections, so he feels it is better if he is elected. However, unlike some of our politicians, a Catholic should never separate his personal morality from his political views.

 

[ProScribe]

Tough call.

If you can be jailed for marijuana possession -(private & personal use)- yet legalize abortion then there must be some imbalance in Law.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Can the USCCB make it any clearer than this:

Moreover, it says that "in the case of an intrinsically unjust law, such as a law permitting abortion or euthanasia, it is never licit to obey it, or to take part in a propaganda campaign in favor of it, or vote for it."

Even if you vote pro-choice you are voting for the support of current legislation legalizing and promoting it.

One word... BAD

 

[MikeK]

I takes patience and discipline to post the full answer. 2 years agoyou wouldn't have taken the time, SA, and you would have somehow managed to be a snot too.

You're growing. Most people don't bother to grow. Very few people impress me. You've impressed me lately. God Bless you as you continue to serve the Lord, hopefully as a Priest

Are you talking about voting for a candidate or party which has a pro-choice stance? That is permissible assuming that the person voting is not doing it to implement pro-choices policies, but because they believe that what the party supports and can accomplish serves the common good more than the other party, despite their pro-choice policies.

If a state/nation put the issue up to a vote, then I do not see how it could ever be permissible for a Catholic to vote in support of making abortion legal. It would take quite a stretch to say that society is better off with abortion legal.

When it comes to a politician, he cannot support pro-choice policies unless it is part of a compromise that he believes will help society more, despite the pro-choice part.

I suppose he or she could say that he would support a pro-choice policy in order to stay elected which would help society more than his potential opponents. In other words, being part of a pro-choice party that he knows will always win elections, so he feels it is better if he is elected. However, unlike some of our politicians, a Catholic should never separate his personal morality from his political views.

 

[Gwendolyn]

To keep it simple, "no Catholic can vote 'pro-choice' in full knowledge of what I posted and still be in full communion."

Then all of the Catholics in most of the world are not in communion, since many countries don't have a party that is pro-life. Mine doesn't.

Edit: to save all the snotty replies, let's go over this once more.

When it comes to abortion, the moral issue is one of PROXIMITY.
These are the groups of people who are excommunicated latae senteniae in an abortion:

• The woman who has the abortion
• The doctor who performs it
• The person who enables the woman (drives her there, helps her make the appointment, etc.)
• If approval for the procedure is needed, then the people responsible for approving the procedure (this can be, for example, a hospital board or a single administrator)

Now:

If the issue is directly put to a vote (for example, "Vote to legalise abortion" or "vote to prohibit it"), then obviously a Catholic cannot vote to legalise abortion, as their proximity to the issue becomes closer. That is, they become directly responsible for enabling abortions.

However, if a candidate supports many things, including abortion, BUT DOES NOTHING TO CHANGE THE CURRENT LAW, it is NOT a mortal sin to vote for them if they offer, for example, fantastic support of other social justice issues (healthcare, social programs, etc.).

So, in a country where there are no politicians who are pro-life - that is, every political party either won't change the law, or will only work to alter it slightly so that there is no further advantage to the pro-life cause - it is not a mortal sin to vote for a candidate if they support abortion as long as you personally do not believe abortion to be a good thing and want to see it further liberalised.

In a country where there are politicians who profess to be pro-life, but actually do nothing to further the cause, the issue is the same.

So spake the theologian responsible for moral theology at my university, appointed by the bishop, who also sits on the board for a Catholic hospital and helps with the morality of cases there.

Also, in the issue of countries whose tax dollars may be used toward abortions, the issue is the same: proximity. One pays tax dollars that go into a pool to be used for all sorts of things, and one does not know precisely where they are going. My taxes could go toward supporting the fire-fighters who work at the station a couple streets over. My neighbour's taxes could go toward paying for the anaesthesia used to anaesthetise a woman undergoing a surgical abortion. It is all up to chance, and there is no direct intent involved.

However, the issue is different if you are in a country which does not already put tax dollars toward abortion - Catholics are obligated to fight such a law if possible.

There are lots of technicalities, but moral theology is very complex and it is not always black-and-white, though I know many here wish it would be. I hope you'll appreciate the information I laid out here, and I hope you will consider it.

 

[Tigg]

Thank you Gwendolyn. What you say makes sense.

What, am I not to vote at all because both candidates are pro choice? Both being the same on this issue, there are lots of other issues to care about as well. And what if the one who is pro life is completely out to lunch on other issues of great importance. Does the church require I vote for him rather than the pro choice one who has much better other policies?

Does the Church say no voting if both parties are pro choice? So then the election is without the Catholic vote? IMO, that will not happen as Catholic's will exercise their right to vote for who they think is right. Which IMO, is better then spitting into the wind and not voting at all.

 

[SpiritualAntiseptic]

I cannot post the entirety of the link I quoted but if you read through it you would find that it addressed your argument and stated abortion and euthanasia take presedent and are unique to all other social welfare ithems that one may arue when voting pro-choice.

Abortion and euthanasia are serious issues that carry more weight, but that does not mean Catholics must vote for any politician or party that works against it. In fact, it is morally wrong to be a one issue voter. Catholics must weigh all the options and determine what is the best course of action.

To keep it simple, "no Catholic can vote 'pro-choice' in full knowledge of what I posted and still be in full communion." They will be gravely sinning and supporting these very grave evils. It is a "no brainer", a Catholic is not able to vote pro-choice while having the full knowledge of the Bishops stance in the USA as well as that of the Vatican.

The problem here is that you aren't being clear on what voting pro-choice means. Are we talking about a politician voting on a single issue? About voting for a party of politician? Voting on a large package of policies?

To go out and choose a pro-choice candidate is to support abortion. Simpla as that. The article I linked makes it so simple as to state you cannot vote for such a candidate. So, it really cannot get any simpler than that. This is 8th reading stuff and everyone here should be able to understand it fine.

That is not true at all. You can't vote for a politician that says he is against abortion, does nothing about it and then hurts the poor and starts wars, while the pro-choice guy keeps the status quo on abortion and helps to create a better, more peaceful society.

I am a conservative, pro-life voter, but I am not going to tell people that a person's view on abortion should determine whether or not we support him or her. I put a lot of weight on the scale for abortion when looking at the issues, but it is morally wrong to ignore all the others.

 

[SpiritualAntiseptic]

Can the USCCB make it any clearer than this:


Even if you vote pro-choice you are voting for the support of current legislation legalizing and promoting it.

One word... BAD

That is talking about a particular law and that Catholics cannot directly support pro-choice laws.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

That is talking about a particular law and that Catholics cannot directly support pro-choice laws.

Sounds contradictory to me. Even you would have to concede it is at the very least splitting hairs.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

I takes patience and discipline to post the full answer. 2 years agoyou wouldn't have taken the time, SA, and you would have somehow managed to be a snot too.

You're growing. Most people don't bother to grow. Very few people impress me. You've impressed me lately. God Bless you as you continue to serve the Lord, hopefully as a Priest

What a loving post... I am getting teary eyed.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Then all of the Catholics in most of the world are not in communion, since many countries don't have a party that is pro-life. Mine doesn't.

Edit: to save all the snotty replies, let's go over this once more.

When it comes to abortion, the moral issue is one of PROXIMITY.
These are the groups of people who are excommunicated latae senteniae in an abortion:

• The woman who has the abortion
• The doctor who performs it
• The person who enables the woman (drives her there, helps her make the appointment, etc.)
• If approval for the procedure is needed, then the people responsible for approving the procedure (this can be, for example, a hospital board or a single administrator)

Now:

If the issue is directly put to a vote (for example, "Vote to legalise abortion" or "vote to prohibit it"), then obviously a Catholic cannot vote to legalise abortion, as their proximity to the issue becomes closer. That is, they become directly responsible for enabling abortions.

However, if a candidate supports many things, including abortion, BUT DOES NOTHING TO CHANGE THE CURRENT LAW, it is NOT a mortal sin to vote for them if they offer, for example, fantastic support of other social justice issues (healthcare, social programs, etc.).

So, in a country where there are no politicians who are pro-life - that is, every political party either won't change the law, or will only work to alter it slightly so that there is no further advantage to the pro-life cause - it is not a mortal sin to vote for a candidate if they support abortion as long as you personally do not believe abortion to be a good thing and want to see it further liberalised.

In a country where there are politicians who profess to be pro-life, but actually do nothing to further the cause, the issue is the same.

So spake the theologian responsible for moral theology at my university, appointed by the bishop, who also sits on the board for a Catholic hospital and helps with the morality of cases there.

Also, in the issue of countries whose tax dollars may be used toward abortions, the issue is the same: proximity. One pays tax dollars that go into a pool to be used for all sorts of things, and one does not know precisely where they are going. My taxes could go toward supporting the fire-fighters who work at the station a couple streets over. My neighbour's taxes could go toward paying for the anaesthesia used to anaesthetise a woman undergoing a surgical abortion. It is all up to chance, and there is no direct intent involved.

However, the issue is different if you are in a country which does not already put tax dollars toward abortion - Catholics are obligated to fight such a law if possible.

There are lots of technicalities, but moral theology is very complex and it is not always black-and-white, though I know many here wish it would be. I hope you'll appreciate the information I laid out here, and I hope you will consider it.

This thread is what I posted was from the Bishops in the USA. However, the Vatican has also stated that Pro-Choice hides an abortion agenda and that no Catholic can support abortion even by voting. So, if you are in full knowledge (as we are) then you cannot vote Pro-Choice and must seek an alternate option because this evil can never be allowed because of it's gravity of sin. However, as we all know, culpability plays a role in our sins and so those Catholics who are ignorant, for whatever reasons, have a lessened culpability and may not be out of full communion. But, it seems safe to say that if any of us vote pro-choice, with the knowledge we have from the Bishops, then we cut ourselves off from full communion with the Church willingly.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Thank you Gwendolyn. What you say makes sense.

What, am I not to vote at all because both candidates are pro choice? Both being the same on this issue, there are lots of other issues to care about as well. And what if the one who is pro life is completely out to lunch on other issues of great importance. Does the church require I vote for him rather than the pro choice one who has much better other policies?

Does the Church say no voting if both parties are pro choice? So then the election is without the Catholic vote? IMO, that will not happen as Catholic's will exercise their right to vote for who they think is right. Which IMO, is better then spitting into the wind and not voting at all.

You are in the USA and in this country and according to the USCCB, we have no excuse since we have pro-life candidates. We can also write in a name on the ballot. But, we can not vote pro-choice with out cutting ourself off from full communion. It is what it is.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Abortion and euthanasia are serious issues that carry more weight, but that does not mean Catholics must vote for any politician or party that works against it. In fact, it is morally wrong to be a one issue voter. Catholics must weigh all the options and determine what is the best course of action.



The problem here is that you aren't being clear on what voting pro-choice means. Are we talking about a politician voting on a single issue? About voting for a party of politician? Voting on a large package of policies?



That is not true at all. You can't vote for a politician that says he is against abortion, does nothing about it and then hurts the poor and starts wars, while the pro-choice guy keeps the status quo on abortion and helps to create a better, more peaceful society.

I am a conservative, pro-life voter, but I am not going to tell people that a person's view on abortion should determine whether or not we support him or her. I put a lot of weight on the scale for abortion when looking at the issues, but it is morally wrong to ignore all the others.

Let me guess... you still have not read the link.

This is addressed in the link I provided. If you feel it is too time consuming then do a ctrl-F and search for "one issue". It explains that abortion and euthenasia are unique and goes on to state that pro-choice is pro-abortion and that we cannot support abortion or euthenasia even by voting for a candidtae that is pro-choice.

Please, read the link from the Bishops in the USA.

 

[Fran75]

Is it acceptable for a canidate to profess to be pro choice because that is what he needs to do to win his party's nomination or get votes from the base and who really does not care on a personal level about abortion and will not be proactive to make it illegal if he if elected to office. If we vote for them can we then say, well I know he didn't change any law with regard to abortion but he said the right thing so I had a moral obligation to vote for him as opposed to another canidate who I did not agree with on this issuse but did agree with on most of the other issues.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Is it acceptable for a canidate to profess to be pro choice because that is what he needs to do to win his party's nomination or get votes from the base and who really does not care on a personal level about abortion and will not be proactive to make it illegal if he if elected to office. If we vote for them can we then say, well I know he didn't change any law with regard to abortion but he said the right thing so I had a moral obligation to vote for him as opposed to another canidate who I did not agree with on this issuse but did agree with on most of the other issues.

Do you have a real life scenario?

If not, it seems the answer is "no".

 

[Fran75]

Jack, I respect your decision to vote for the candiate of your choice, whatever your reasons but I happen to agree with SA's interpretation on this one. I feel that there is very little chance of Roe vs Wade being overturned regardless of who is in office, of course I can't be sure but recent history has proven this thus far, therefore I feel comfortable in choosing a canidate based on a varity of issuse pro choice / pro life being only one of them. When I vote for a pro choice canidate it is in spite of his views on abortion not because of them. I honesty think that there are many republican canidates who are pro life but couldn't care less a about abortion and that there are many democratic candiates who feel abortion is a crime but feel they must tow the party line to have any chance of being elected. I would welcome the day it was put up for genaral vote so neither party could use this issues to manipulate the voters.

 

[Fran75]

Sorry, couldn't finish my last post as my little guy started having a melt down in the middle of it. We had an issuse with this in our parish during the general election of Bush vs Kerry. Our priest then, problably one of our favorites in general, for several Sunday homilies in the row, in round about way promoted views similar to yours, most of our parishners are Democrat and also had moral objections to the war in Iraq, some where close to leaving because of this, basically he kind of had to apoloagize and in a bullitien printed an article by a bishop that was pretty close to what SA posted. Our new, older, wiser priest while, not being afraid to "go there" on just about everything has wisely steared clear of this so far.