Catholics warned against being duped into voting for Obama again
Tags
Related Posts
About the author
The American Life League has written an open letter to Cardinal Timothy Dolan, the highest ranking Roman Catholic Archbishop in the United States, asking him to withdraw his invitation to President Barack Obama to the Alfred E. Smith dinner, and has warned Catholics not to be duped into voting for Obama again.
“I believe Mr. Obama sees the 2012 Al Smith dinner as an opportunity to, once again, use his wiles to entice the Catholics in America to “trust” him — a trust that he has betrayed time and time again,” said Judie Brown, president of American Life League in a statement.
Brown explained in a phone interview with The Christian Post on Thursday that the main reason why Catholics are as ambivalent about politicians as they are, including Obama, is because the average Catholic in today’s culture does not even realize that abortion is a sin against God. “They need to realize that there are fundamental differences between individuals running for congress, and they should first put the Catholic teachings of the Church foremost in their mind before deciding on who to vote,” the ALL president said to CP.
ALL reminds that in the 2008 Presidential elections, President Obama managed to capture 54 percent of the Catholic vote, despite his public support of abortion and contraception. The organization claims that Obama has been able to rally Catholic support by using the tactics of a shrewd politician, and ALL is now concerned that speaking at this year’s event may give him the platform to again gain support of Catholics.
The Alfred E. Smith dinner event is scheduled for Oct. 18, 2012 in New York, and will feature both presidential candidates as keynote speakers. The dinner stands in honor of Alfred E. Smith, the 42nd Governor of New York who is also known as the first-ever Roman Catholic presidential candidate. Over the course of the past 60 years, both presidential candidates have traditionally been invited to the dinner. Brown noted that the main purpose of the event is to raise awareness for various Catholic charities and to raise money.
Obama, who spoke at the 63rd Annual Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner in 2008, has been invited to speak again by Cardinal Dolan – but the Life League are calling for the archbishop to reconsider his decision based on Obama’s policies this past year that have threatened core Catholic beliefs. [More]
SOURCE
Leave a Comment
Photo Archive
-
May 23, 2013 1:58
Religious freedom reports see little improvement in troubling countries
-
May 23, 2013 1:43
LGBT Catholics find a new supporter: An openly gay priest
-
May 22, 2013 1:37
Tornadoes exact deadly toll; region needs ‘a lot of prayers right now’
-
May 22, 2013 1:32
State Dept. report says countries have repressed religious freedom with laws
-
May 22, 2013 1:23
2 lawsuits filed against Maine Catholic church
-
May 21, 2013 1:32
Church Whistle-Blowers Join Forces on Abuse
-
May 20, 2013 5:17
Maine Catholic church closing its doors
-
May 20, 2013 5:14
Muslim leaders in US facing challenges inside and outside the faith
-
May 17, 2013 5:43
Archbishop clarifies remarks about Cuomo
-
May 17, 2013 5:40
Fr. Gary Meier goes public with clergy experience
37 Comments
In the United States of America, candidates for public office are not subject to religious tests. So says the Constitution, anyway. Meanwhile, the ALL and the cardinal can duke it out while Americans LOL and vote for the candidate of their choice.
Right, including Catholics who are CINO and vote for Mr. 666.
I thank the American Life League for writting Dolan. More Catholic Organizations should write also.
I cannot believe that ANYONE could be “duped into voting for Obama” again, much less the better-than-average educated Catholic!
Unfortunately, RC, a recent national poll found Obama had more support among Catholics than the population at large. The bishops and priests have not done an adequate job in helping the average Catholic see the link between Catholic teaching and their vote.
The American Life League should be commended for writing to the Cardinal; and I agree, he should withdraw the invitation to Mr. 666.
Let no one be “duped” into voting one way or the other by The American Life League, Cardinal T. Dolan or his ecclesiastical colleagues. Vote according to your own conscience and not according to another`s conscience or bias.
Actually, vote according to your conscience ONLY if it is well formed. Consult the Catechism for more information about formation of conscience.
Typically, Jim, we know a conscience is well-formed only if it agrees with the Church’s teaching.
That is correct, Carl. You probably were being sarcastic, but I am being dead serious.
If a conscience is considered to be “well-formed” only if it agrees with the propaganda, then it’s nothing coming for your conscience.
Let me restate this correctly (I was interrupted and prematurely submitted it).
If a conscience is considered to be “well-formed” only if it agrees with the propaganda, then it’s not coming from YOUR conscience
Well, responding now to your modified post: conscience comes into play in gray areas, where the Church has not specifically ruled. So, for example, is it moral for a couple to use NFP, given their circumstances (NFP is not always morally licit). So, any decision a person makes must be made in light of the definitive teachings of the Church. Thus, if they conclude something that clearly contradicts the teaching of the Church, we know for sure they are being immoral.
But not according to THEIR conscience. See the difference?
I think I see what you are saying, RC, but I think you misunderstand what conscience is. Church teachings serve as a guide in helping a person reach a decision when the area is gray; again, the issue of use of NFP is a good example. NFP is morally licit at times, other times it is not. By contrast, some things are clearly verboten: e.g., abortion always is wrong. So, in the case of deciding about abortion, there is no role for conscience (i.e., personal discernment about the issue) — the issue is clear-cut. In this case, we can use Church teaching to ensure the decision we make is morally licit. In the case of abortion, if our malformed conscience tells us it is okay to have an abortion, then we consult the Catechism or a priest and find that it is always wrong, then we have our malformed conscience properly formed by definitive Church teaching. If you read the Catechism in its entirety, it never says that, in the end, you have to do what you think is right. Rather, it says that you have to do what you think is right when the situation is not a black-or-white case.
To clarify that last sentence: you have to use your conscience to determine what is right when the Church teaching needs nuanced application to the circumstance. But, again, if the person knows the teaching of the Church, they will know when the teaching of the Church is black-and-white, and when it is not so black-and-white. For example, do I kill this man who has invaded my house and has a gun to my wife’s head? That is not a black-and-white situation. By contrast, do I kill this man walking down the street because I don’t like his ethnic origin? That is a (no pun intended) black-and-white situation.
RC — I just want you to know you are on the list of posters here showing promise — with more prayers for you and some time, you may become a full-blown Catholic!
I am a Christian who will not be led by blind obedience — only by my conscience. If something doesn’t pass the “smell test,” I will not succumb.
Okay, RC — but you now have started your own church, the church of Recovering Catholic. Here’s the good news: you are the pope in your church. Here’s the bad news: you’re not a Catholic.
A label is not important to me. I am trying to adhere to the “Christ Consciousness,” which existed long before Christianity as a religion.
RC — the only way to achieve “Christ Consciousness” in its fullness is to be a faithful member of the RC Church, including frequent use of the Sacrament of Reconciliatoin, attending Mass and receiving the Eucharist on Sundays and holy days, and hopefully Eucharistic Adoration and recitiation of the Rosary. You won’t get to where you want to get going the route you are going. So, I don’t care about labels either — I care about the outcome. And, your way leads to a dead-end.
Agreed, RC — however, here’s the difference — the Catechism is not propaganda, but rather God’s inerrant guidance and teaching of his children.
The Cathechism may be guidance in a perfect world, but we don’t live in a perfect world. People have to make very heart-wrenching decisions at times, and they’re not going to say, “Oh, where did I put my Cathechism?”
But, they SHOULD do that, RC. If I as a man am in love with my boyfriend and feel, “well, I really really love him. God is a God of love. Therefore, it follows that it is okay for us to have sex” — I am wrong. What you are saying is Catholics rarely let the Church guide them — and I agree. But, they all are WRONG for not seeking the guidance of the Church. By contrast, shortly after my conversion, God and I had some heart-to-heart talks about sexual issues; and — by His grace — I listened to what He had to say and accepted it, even though it was very difficult for me. Another example: I voted Demon-crat all of my life, including for George McGovern in 1972 — but in 1992, when set to vote for Clinton, God laid it on my heart that I could not in good conscience vote for him because he is pro-choice, so I voted for Bush. I have voted pro-life ever since (which effectively makes me a Republican). So, let me state, I am a sinner like everyone else, and I have committed many many mortal sins in the past — but, by God’s grace, strive to live an ever-more-perfect life (Matthew 5:48), even though I continue to sin — but hopefully, not mortally. So, in summary: yes, all Catholics should get out their Catechism if they are in doubt.
Well, for one thing, Jim, it doesn’t make one bit of difference which party one votes for as far as the voter being pro-choice or not pro-choice; the elected officials can only follow the law, which at present, is Roe v. Wade. The Supremes spoke and no subsequent election affects their decision. Secondly, getting back to the catechism and the formation of a right conscience (no pun intended), look at the very men at the top of the heap in the hierarchy who ignored clerical child abuse for decades. These are the guys who are determining what a right conscience is, and their OWN consciences are so bad that they passed their pedophile priests from around from parish to parish being more concerned with the “image” of the Catholic Church rather than with the harm their actions were doing to the children. THEY don’t even have rightly-formed consciences! Hypocrits, as Jesus would say.
Recovering — if you look at Catholic dogma used to form one’s conscience, this dogma was proclamied centuries before these 20th century errors occurred. Thus, the dogma is not related to the current problems in the Church. And, if you look at the priest from Philadelphia who was recently convicted for negligence, he essentially admitted he made mistakes when he said he should have stayed a parish priest. So, his conscience clearly told him he was wrong. Having a well-formed conscience in no way guarantees you won’t sin — in fact, just the oppostie — we all are sinners, even those with perfectly formed consciences. Thus, looking at the errors of 20th century priests and bishops does not in any way argue for the position that we should ignore what the Church teaches in forming our consciences.
In essence, Recovering, you are confusing sinning with having an improperly formed conscience. You essentially are saying is these 20th century priests had properly formed consciences, they wouldn’t have done with they did. What I am saying is that you can’t in any way draw that conclusion — you cannot say a sinner did not have a properly formed conscience. Thus, the priests and bishops who offended either by action s or inactions did not necessarily have malformed consciences.
Ryan did not cause the economics that require drastic measures to save the social programs that the Catholic hierarchy advocate. The Church is no stranger to economic reality.Ryan and all good Americans will remember the poor.(not if you have gone over the economic cliff) On the other hand , the Church is no stranger to violations of Human Righte. Thereis no more horrible violation of Human Righte than the Obama?Biden killing of innocent Human Beings through abortion. Their policy is to spread this atrocity throughout the world.Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict, spoke before the U.N. in favor of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights(UDHR). John Paul called UDHR the finest statemennt of Human Conscience ever written. You cant be a Catholic and violate the UDHR like Biden does!!!
Call me uninformed, but I am under the impression that most Catholics do not like being told who to vote for or who to vote against by church authorities.
I agree Scott.
However, Ryan’s budget takes so much away from the poor and disabled that it is hard for some Catholics to remain silent.
I have never been an activist for anything and never even cared about elections.
As a Catholic I felt extremely insulted that he says he is Catholic. So for some reason this is an outlet for that.
Be aware that the pro-choice issue is the only issue for many on this site.
Yes, vote for the anti=catholic mormon, according to the american Life League, which beleives that the right to life begins at conception and ends at birth. Perhaps we should look to Matthew 25 and change the Democrat donkey to a sheep and the Republican elephant to a goat.
Arnold — to say that the American Life League does not care about people after they are born is a complete Demon-crat garbage lie. Further, find me a greater violation of anyone’s rights than killing them before they are born. If you vote for Obama, you are voting to continue killing over one million babies a year. You’ll be held accountable for every one of your decisions after you die, Arnold. I’m not proposing you’re going to Hell — I hope you don’t. But, God is not just a God of love and infinite mercy, He also is a God of justice — and there will be an accounting in Purgatory for all saved souls.
Hoe bout not providing adequate medical care and housing for the severely deformed, how bout not providing education for the poor, come on Jim, to be prolife is to provide for people from the womb to the tomb.
To be Catholic is to love your brother (neighbour) as yourself and help provide for his welfare – from the womb to the tomb.
Beautiful Catholic Lady thak you.
Jim, I wonder if God’smercy and love wwon’t exceed his justice.
No one knows how all this works, Jack — certainly not me. Theologians who don’t have an answer simply say, “It’s a mystery.” I do believe God is infinitely loving, infinitely merciful, and infinitely just — but how to reconcile those three is a real mystery, and something only God can do.