The dilemma of being a Catholic Democrat

[MKJ]

MJK: Many of the modern-day 'Neoconservatives' or faux conservatives are ex-Marxists and ex-Troskyites. This would explain their ideology being closer to that of Marx than true, Traditional Conservatism.

It might explain their sympathy for that view. I think actually though the reason those perspectives are so similar is they come out of the same historical period and the same intellectual history. Marx was in part inspired by the things he saw happening in the Industrial Revolution. THe neoliberal/conservatives today have a lot in common with the industrialists Marx opposed who wanted to destroy the traditional social structures that protected labourers so they could be exploited in the factories. Both Marx and the industrialists that Enlightenment belief in that history was bringing us closer and closer to a perfect knowledge and a perfect society, and a kind of conception of God that was very close to deism.

 

[Virgil the Roman]

Marx and Engels never really planned upon abolishing Capitalism; just using their theories as a mechanism to exploit the classes and rob them of their monies via confiscatory taxation. Heck, Engels railed against 'Industrial Exploitation'. Yet, he own a factory himself; engaging in the same exploitation he supposedly denounced. Communism's farce; it never was about a worker's paradise or equality to all; it always --- always in the end siphoned tax monies from the whole, to the moneyed, wealthy national and international elites and banksters. A private central bank is one the planks of Communist platform and a central mechanism for this organised and systematic robbery of nations. Why abolish true capital (be it gold, silver, diamonds, platinum, etc.) whenever you can rob a nation of it and enrich you, your family members, and your elite friends? What's the escape clause? Simple: transfer the funds, privately and clandestinely overseas. Generally, it's many common folk who are 'none the wiser' or simply never knew or realised that this ever took place. They were ignorant. Now, did Communism sometimes, in some countries, actually try to make socialism work? In some case, Yes. However, that is not what always happened.

 

[Fantine]

The interesting thing about this thread is that, while Republicans are kvetching, not a single Democrat has come forward to give testimony about the "dilemma" he or she feels.

Much ado about nothing.

 

[Antigone]

The interesting thing about this thread is that, while Republicans are kvetching, not a single Democrat has come forward to give testimony about the "dilemma" he or she feels.

Much ado about nothing.

Well, Colin Powell just came out (no pun intended) in favour of gay marriage. Then again he never did sit well with the Neocon warhawks, what with his moderation, expertise and preference for pesky things such as 'truth' and 'facts'.

 

[BabyChristian22]

The interesting thing about this thread is that, while Republicans are kvetching, not a single Democrat has come forward to give testimony about the "dilemma" he or she feels.

"For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own likings" - 2 Timothy 4:3

​

 

[AMDG]

The interesting thing about this thread is that, while Republicans are kvetching, not a single Democrat has come forward to give testimony about the "dilemma" he or she feels.

Maybe that's because a book about it is already available.

Amazon.com: Can a Catholic Be a Democrat? (9781933184197): David Carlin: Books

 

[docpotter]

"For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own likings" - 2 Timothy 4:3

​

That is a good and fitting scripture. Another that comes to mind is this one ..

" Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter " Isaiah 5 :20

To be FOR gay marriage, is to be AGAINST the Word of God. You can't have it both ways , you cannot serve two masters.

 

[BabyChristian22]

That is a good and fitting scripture. Another that comes to mind is this one ..

" Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter " Isaiah 5 :20

To be FOR gay marriage, is to be AGAINST the Word of God. You can't have it both ways , you cannot serve two masters.

I totally agree with you.

 

[Virgil the Roman]

.

 

[docpotter]

" I do not want you to be participants with demons. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of demons too ; you cannot have a part in both the Lord's table and the table of demons. Are you trying to arose the Lord's Jealousy ? Are we stronger than He " ? - Paul writing to the saints in Corinth 55 AD

 

[BabyChristian22]

"...Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error. ...Though they know God's decree that those who do such things deserve to die, they not only do them but approve those who practice them." - Romans 1:26,27;32

 

[Cosmic Charlie]

The official teaching of the DNC is that anyone who doesn't agree with so-called "gay marriage" is a bigot. So either Catholic Democrats agree with so-called "gay marriage" which means rejecting the core teachings of the Catholic Church and automatic excommunication or they are called a bigot by their own political party.

Wait

Back up a second.

Where are you getting this "automatic excommunication" thing if I believe that civil rights are rights no privileges to be voted on by the majority ?

I'm going to need chapter and verse on that btw. Some vague indirect, questionable logic thingy isn't go to pass muster.

This one serious charge and I'm want to see it backed up by black letter teaching.

 

[Antigone]

Wait

Back up a second.

Where are you getting this "automatic excommunication" thing if I believe that civil rights are rights no privileges to be voted on by the majority ?

I'm going to need chapter and verse on that btw. Some vague indirect, questionable logic thingy isn't go to pass muster.

This one serious charge and I'm want to see it backed up by black letter teaching.

...Aaaaaand cue backpedalling.

 

[AMDG]

Wait

Back up a second.

Where are you getting this "automatic excommunication" thing if I believe that civil rights are rights no privileges to be voted on by the majority ?

I'm going to need chapter and verse on that btw. Some vague indirect, questionable logic thingy isn't go to pass muster.

This one serious charge and I'm want to see it backed up by black letter teaching.

I think Catholic Answers had a questioner ask about the list of things (sins) that carry the penalty of automatic excomunication.

 

[sylverpiano]

Wait

Back up a second.

Where are you getting this "automatic excommunication" thing if I believe that civil rights are rights no privileges to be voted on by the majority ?

I'm going to need chapter and verse on that btw. Some vague indirect, questionable logic thingy isn't go to pass muster.

This one serious charge and I'm want to see it backed up by black letter teaching.

BabyChrisyain22 does not back up most of what he posts. Just my opinion, but his posts lack a certain credibility. The implication that one can be automatically excommunicated for belonging to the Democratic party, or voting for a Democratic candidate is ludicrous and absurd. None the less, he will not post anything in corroboration. He is just posting his random opinion, and justifying his rather extreme political beliefs with a tenuous connection to how he imagines the Catholic Church should be.

 

[Wolseley]

Wait

Back up a second.

Where are you getting this "automatic excommunication" thing if I believe that civil rights are rights no privileges to be voted on by the majority ?

I'm going to need chapter and verse on that btw. Some vague indirect, questionable logic thingy isn't go to pass muster.

This one serious charge and I'm want to see it backed up by black letter teaching.

Well....the Catechism states, in Nos. 2357 and 2359, that homosexual acts are gravely depraved, intrinsically disordered, contrary to natural law, and can in no way be approved; therefore, homosexual persons are called to chastity.

Ergo, entering into, or approving of, homosexual "marriage" is in violation of Catholic dogma.

The Catechism further states, in Nos. 2088 and 2089, that voluntary doubt is a disregarding or refusal to hold as true what God has revealed and the Church proposes for belief; and incredulity is the neglect of revealed truth or the willful refusal to assent to it.

Deliberately refusing to submit to the teaching of the Church on the subject of homosexual "marriage" is certainly a sin; but not being a canon lawyer, I am not in the position of judging it to be mortal or venial. Those attempting it, as well as the cleric, if any, who presides over it, to my mind would be incurring a mortal sin---and any mortal sin incurs excommunication without any formal declaration of such. As for those who merely approve of it, I would say the offense is venial, unless of course they were directly involved in committing the act somehow.

For whatever it's worth.

 

[sylverpiano]

In point of fact:

a thirty second search answered the question as to what offenses are punishable by automatic excommunication:

Source: Catholic Answers

Question:

Having an abortion means automatic excommunication from the Church. Are there other sins that carry this penalty?


Answer:

Yes. In the 1983 Code of Canon Law (CIC) eight other sins carry the penalty of automatic excommunication: apostasy, heresy, schism (CIC 1364:1), violating the sacred species (CIC 1367), physically attacking the pope (CIC 1370:1), sacramentally absolving an accomplice in a sexual sin (CIC 1378:1), consecrating a bishop without authorization (CIC 1382), and directly violating the seal of confession (1388:1).
Apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith. Heresy is the obstinate doubt or denial, after baptism, of a defined Catholic doctrine. Schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or the refusal to be in communion with members of the Church who are in communion with him (CIC 751).
Violation of the sacred species is the throwing away the consecrated species of Christ's body or blood or the taking or retaining of them for a sacrilegious purpose (CIC 1367).
Physically attacking the pope is self-explanatory, as are absolving an accomplice in a sexual sin and consecrating a bishop without authorization from the Vatican.
A direct violation of the seal of confession is one in which both the penitent and the penitent's sin can easily be determined by the confessor's words or behavior. Again, the penalty of automatic excommunication does not apply if no one perceives the disclosure (CIC 1330).
Automatic excommunication for abortion (CIC 1398) applies not only to the woman who has the abortion, but to "all those who commit this crime with knowledge of the penalty attached, and [this] includes those accomplices without whose help the crime would not have been committed" (Evangelium Vitae 62).
No one is automatically excommunicated for any offense if, without any fault of his own, he was unaware that he was violating a law (CIC 1323:2) or that a penalty was attached to the law (CIC 1324:1:9). The same applies if one was a minor, had the imperfect use of reason, was forced through grave or relatively grave fear, was forced through serious inconvenience, or in certain other circumstances (CIC 1324).


Edited to add:

One might notice that being in favor of same sex marriage, or being a Democrat, is not on this list. It was just another falsehood posted by BabyChristian22 in the OP.

 

[Antigone]

BabyChrisyain22 does not back up most of what he posts. Just my opinion, but his posts lack a certain credibility.

Not just your opinion, trust me.

We've been through this debate many, many times here at OBOB. The CC will never say that you will be automatically excommunicated by belonging to the DNC, not only because they would lose their tax-exempt status but also because people can have various reasons for voting for a candidate and as long as you can conscientously say that these reasons outweigh the fact that most democratic candidates are pro-choice, you are allowed to vote for them.

Or, to bring up the analogy that I'm so fond of: over here, 80% of all people are pro-choice and being against abortion is political suicide over here. Thus, we only have one - realistically - pro-life party, who also happen to be decidedly anti-Catholic.

So tell me, BC, which would you vote for?

 

[docpotter]

A practicing homosexual will be excommunicated from the kingdom of heaven, which may be a little worse than being excommunicated from the Catholic church.

My reference is in the Apostle Paul

 

[Antigone]

A practicing homosexual will be excommunicated from the kingdom of heaven, which may be a little worse than being excommunicated from the Catholic church.

According to Catholic doctrine one pretty much leads to the other...