Priest Says

[hérisson]

[quote name='Dave' post='1702850' date='Nov 17 2008, 01:07 AM']You forget that we're not just called to follow our conscience; we're to follow a CORRECT conscience. A correct conscience is one that is properly formed, that is, formed by the teachings of God and His Church. If our conscience goes against Church teaching, then we don't have a properly-formed conscience. Conscience isn't the same as personal opinion.[/quote]

Once again, you're wrong. I never forgot that we have a duty to form our conscience correctly: I've been teaching that on and on, and I invite you to form yours before trying to give "brotherly correction" to others in such a harsh way.

[hérisson]

[quote name='kamiller42' post='1702973' date='Nov 17 2008, 03:03 AM']So was it necessary for Jesus to ask for the forgiveness of those who persecuted him? According to your logic, no as long they gave it serious consideration.[/quote]

Wrong : you should never attribute wrong statements to other people's logic before making sure you've grasped it, which is definitely not the case here. It is not my logic that says people should follow their conscience, but Church teaching (CCC 1790). Of course, the Church also says we should form our conscience correctly. Yet if you read zwergel88's statement carefully (because that's what were discussing about), then you may realize that there is no sufficient proof to say that he did not try to do so. Of course, I think his analysis is wrong, but wrongly analyzing a political situation or candidate is not a mortal sin in itself.

Btw, those who persecuted Jesus did not follow their conscience, but feelings of hatred, jealousy, fear,...

[hérisson]

[quote name='Dave' post='1702858' date='Nov 17 2008, 01:10 AM']Knowingly voting for a candidate who promotes evil is a mortal sin. That is Church teaching. I'm sorry to see that you're either unable or unwilling to recognize it as such. The Church doesn't permit anyone in the state of mortal sin to receive Holy Communion. Face it -- I (as well as Apotheoun and many others) am right and you are wrong.[/quote]

CCC 1859 : "Mortal sin requires full knowledge and complete consent. It presupposes knowledge of the sinful character of the act, of its opposition to God's law"...

I don't see anything in Zwergel88's words that shows he had knowledge of the sinful character of voting for Obama. This is enough to show that your conclusions are not based on Church teaching.

[Dave]

[quote name='hérisson' post='1703865' date='Nov 18 2008, 04:09 AM']Once again, you're wrong. I never forgot that we have a duty to form our conscience correctly: I've been teaching that on and on, and I invite you to form yours before trying to give "brotherly correction" to others in such a harsh way.[/quote]

YOU are wrong. Affirming Zwergel88 in her wrong actions isn't advocating a correct conscience. And my conscience is formed according to Church teaching. If I was harsh, it was because it was necessary. Sometimes the most loving thing you can do for someone is slap 'em upside the head. You really need to form your conscience correctly, as if you had, you wouldn't be making excuses for Zwergel88.

[Dave]

[quote name='hérisson' post='1703869' date='Nov 18 2008, 04:37 AM']CCC 1859 : "Mortal sin requires full knowledge and complete consent. It presupposes knowledge of the sinful character of the act, of its opposition to God's law"...

I don't see anything in Zwergel88's words that shows he had knowledge of the sinful character of voting for Obama. This is enough to show that your conclusions are not based on Church teaching.[/quote]

I know very well what the catechism and Church teach, and I will thank you to quit acting like I don't. You're the one distorting Church teaching, not me. Zwergel88 had been corrected numerous times on these boards by various individuals (this has gone on ever since long before you joined Phatmass), and she still wouldn't listen (note that zwergel88 is a she, not a he). Anyone who's been corrected numerous times and acts like they know better can't truly say they didn't know. So you see? It's YOUR conclusions that aren't based on Church teaching. Time to quit making excuses for others' wrong actions and admit that you're wrong. You're not following Church teaching but rather your own wrong interpretations of it.

Edited November 18, 2008 by Dave

[Dave]

[url="http://www.catholiccitizens.org/views/contentview.asp?c=48758"]http://www.catholiccitizens.org/views/cont...iew.asp?c=48758[/url]


[quote]Administrator of the Catholic Diocese of Charleston Gets Clobbered for Teaching the Truth - By the Bishop
11/17/2008 9:47:00 PM
By Barbara Kralis

Recently, a Charleston Catholic diocesan pastor, Father Jay Scott Newman, JCL, wrote a column to his flock which he published within his November 9, 2008 St. Mary's Catholic parish bulletin. [1] In it, Fr. Newman advised:

"Voting for a pro-abortion politician when a plausible pro-life alternative exists constitutes material cooperation with intrinsic evil, and those Catholics who do so place themselves outside of the full communion of Christ's Church and under the judgment of divine law. Persons in this condition should not receive Holy Communion until and unless they are reconciled to God in the Sacrament of Penance, lest they eat and drink their own condemnation."

Everyone who is in good standing with the Catholic Faith would automatically agree with Father's statement and applaud his pastoral action. And they should. Fr. Newman holds graduate degrees in Sacred Theology and Canon Law and knows whereof he speaks. [2]

Fr. Newman's Catholic parish, very supportive of his courageous stand, is most likely wondering right now: Why does the diocese's temporary Administrator, [3] Msgr. Martin Laughlin, repudiate the Church's teachings regarding Catholics voting for pro-abortion politicians?

Recently, this writer asked Fr. Newman for an interview. This was Father's response:

"Dear Barbara, Thank you for your email. The diocesan administrator has asked me not to give interviews about this matter, and in obedience to his request, I must refer you to the Diocese of Charleston for all inquiries. Thank you. May the LORD bless the work of your hands."

When this writer tried to re-read Fr. Newman's essay published at his parish website, it was apparent the link had been removed. Readers are now automatically forwarded to the diocese of Charleston's website where Msgr. Laughlin's repudiation, in both .PDF and video formats, is found on their front page. Thankfully, I had earlier captured Fr. Newman's bulletin column permanently to my computer and can provide it for you herewith.

Msgr. Laughlin repudiates, in part:

"Christ gives us freedom to explore our own conscience and to make our own decisions while adhering to the law of God and the teachings of the faith. Therefore, if a person has formed his or her conscience well, he or she should not be denied Communion, nor be told to go to confession before receiving Communion. The pulpit is reserved for the Word of God.... We should all come together to support the President-elect...."

Nowhere within Fr. Newman's column could this writer find implied that Father Newman could read the minds and hearts of how his parishioners voted in the privacy of their voting booth. Nor did Fr. Newman say he would deny anyone Holy Communion [based on canon 915]. [4] Father would not deny Holy Communion because he would not be aware of any voter's hidden sins. In addition, Fr. Newman did not discuss the principle of 'the ends justifying the means.' Instead, he was measuring the outcome - what is the proportion of good or evil that can be done.

The Charleston diocesan administrator, Msgr. Laughlin, thereby creates more scandal to the already bumfuzzeled faithful. Catholic laity, as well as clergy, is asking each other:

"Does the Church really teach the way Msgr. Laughlin teaches or does Fr. Newman's column actually represent the Church's infallible moral teachings regarding Catholics voting for pro-abortion politicians?"

The answer to that question is not difficult to find among the Church's documents. Catholic libraries are filled with the Church's infallibly taught moral documents teaching that abortion has always been condemned by the authority which Christ Himself first conferred upon Peter [the Pope, the 'Solemn Magisterium'] and then his Successors, and to the apostles [those bishops and theologians when in complete communion with the Pope, 'Ordinary Magisterium'] as being a grave mortal sin, intrinsically evil and illicit. This basic moral teaching is based upon natural law and the written Word of God, proclaimed by the Catholic Church through its Sacred Tradition and through its Solemn and Ordinary Magisterium, that no one, no law, can ever make licit an act, which is intrinsically evil and illicit.

Keeping in mind that there will be other faithful priests who will be preaching in the same manner as Fr. Newman, and there may possibly be other diocesan Bishops or heads that try to repudiate these priests, one would do well to recall this column and use it to rebuke error and heresy to those who are confused.

"The theocentricity of the priestly existence is truly necessary in our entirely function-oriented world in which everything is based on calculable and ascertainable performance. The priest must truly know God from within and thus bring him to men and women: this is the prime service that contemporary humanity needs." [5]

Before we visit a few of the many teachings on this moral subject, let us first take a brief look at some of the pro-abortion policies and legislations that President elect Barack Obama supports and has promoted.

Since July 2007, over one year before the presidential election would take place, Barack Obama pledged to his supporters that he would overturn every [hundreds] pro-life law in all 50 states limiting abortion. He said that his very first action would be signing the FOCA, if it became law, codifying Roe v Wade and allowing unlimited abortions in the land. He promised he would not yield nor would he allow Planned Parenthood to yield to pro-life pressures. He vowed to elect judges who would affirm a women's right to abortion. And, he consistently for past 4 years voted against the Illinois Born Alive Infants bill to protect babies who are born alive after a botched abortion. [6]

For example, in 1997, Obama voted against Illinois Senate Bill [SB] 230, which would have turned doctors into felons by banning so-called partial-birth abortion [click here and here and here [7] for videos of this infanticide]. The excellent legislation defined a 'fetus' as a person, & could have criminalized virtually all abortion.

No one can doubt, therefore, that it is perfectly clear Barack Hussein Obama will do everything in his power to carry out his campaign promises to continue to make abortion and infanticide the law of our nation and among third world countries. Why would 54% Catholics vote for such a man?

With this clearly established proof of President elect Obama's pro-abortion support the question must be asked:

Is what Fr. Newman taught in his bulletin really "diverting the focus from the Catholic Church's clear teaching against abortion" and Catholics' consciences allowing them to vote for pro-abortion politicians, as Msgr. Martin Laughlin said, or is Msgr. Laughlin seriously confused?

Please go to 'Part Two' to examine what the Catholic Church, its Popes and those Bishops in union with the Pope, teaches us about its Church members forming right consciences, wrongly voting for pro-abortion politicians, and being worthy to receive Holy Communion.

NOTES:

[1] The 'JCL' designation after a priest's or bishop's name indicates an Licentiate of Canon Law, an academic degree granted by universities for proficiency in theology, philosophy, canon law, etc. The holder is called a Licentiate. The degree ranks below that of a Doctor of Master, and usually above that of Bachelor degree.

[2] Father Newman studied for the priesthood at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome and received priestly formation at the Pontifical North American College; he holds graduate degrees in sacred theology and canon law. He was ordained to the deaconate on 19 December 1992 at St. Peter's Basilica in Vatican City and to the priesthood on 10 July 1993 at the Cathedral Church of St. John the Baptist in Charleston, South Carolina.

Father Newman has served as Catholic Chaplain to The Citadel. Before coming to St. Mary's, he served at the Pontifical College Josephinum in Columbus, Ohio as Assistant Professor of Canon Law in the School of Theology and Dean of Men in the undergraduate College. He began his service as the sixteenth pastor of St. Mary's on 28 June 2001.

Father Newman is a papal Knight in the Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulchre of Jerusalem and a member of the Fellowship of Catholic Scholars, the Society for Catholic Liturgy, and the Canon Law Society of America. He also serves in the Diocese of Charleston as Director of Continuing Education for Priests and as a member of the Presbyteral Council and the Vocations Board. Father Newman is active in ecumenical affairs, particularly with Anglicans, Lutherans, and Baptists, and is a frequent speaker at conferences and retreats.

Fr. Newman was born on August 6, l962 in Elkin, North Carolina, a small mill town in the shadow of the Blue Ridge Mountains, and grew up in Greensboro, North Carolina. His parents' families were mostly Southern Baptists and members of the Church of the Brethren, but at age 13 he became an atheist. In 1980 he matriculated at Princeton University, and there on 15 October 1981 he experienced a conversion to the Lord Jesus Christ. On 17 January 1982 he was baptized in the Episcopal Church, and on 5 November 1982 he was received into full communion with the Catholic Church and confirmed.

[3] On August 14, 2007, the Bishop of Charleston, Robert J. Baker, S.T.D., was appointed Bishop of Birmingham, AL, and was ordained to that See on October 2, 2007. The Vatican has not yet appointed another Bishop to govern the Charleston diocese. Bishop Baker, one of the 16 faithful U.S. Bishops who declared publicly that he would deny Holy Communion to pro-abortion politicians, also encouraged the weekly Tridentine Latin Mass within the Charleston diocese.

[4] "Those upon whom the penalty of excommunication or interdict has been imposed or declared, and others who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin, are not to be admitted to Holy Communion" [Code of Canon Law c.915]. Cf n.4, 'Redemptionis Sacramentum' points out that the priest may find an individual's judgment about his own worthiness to receive the Eucharist to be in grave error and the priest must deny him Holy Communion, according to c.915. Cf "Redemptionis Sacramentum.' warns that manifest persons who are also 'unambiguously pro-abortion" must be refused Holy Communion.

[5] Address of His Holiness Benedict XVI to the Members of the Roman Curia at the Traditional Exchange of Christmas Greetings, Clementine Hall, Friday, December 22, 2006.

[6] Cf Planned Parenthood Action Fund speech, July 17, 2007, by Barack Obama. [url="http://lauraetch.googlepages.com/barackobamabeforeplannedparenthoodaction"]http://lauraetch.googlepages.com/barackoba...arenthoodaction[/url]

[7] This working 'YouTube' link requests you first click on their 'Confirm Birth Date' button, as some of the content, they say, is inappropriate for some users. I recommend that you go ahead and click the button, as this video's content is less violent than most of the programs that are currently on national television during prime time viewing. In fact, when President elect Obama signs the FOCA, a child needs to only be 13 years of age to obtain a murderous abortion without her parents knowledge or permission. Talk about the youth being protected from violent video content.[/quote]

[Dave]

Apparently the above article was also on the RenewAmerica site, and that's where the following article also comes from: [url="http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/kralis/081118"]http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/kralis/081118[/url]

[quote]In this second part, let's examine what the Catholic Church, its Popes and those Bishops in unions with the Pope, teaches us about its Church members forming right consciences, wrongly voting for pro-abortion politicians, and being worthy to receive Holy Communion.

Solemn and Ordinary Magisterial Teachings

# "The Church stresses that a well-formed Christian conscience does not permit one to vote for a political program or an individual law which contradicts the fundamental contents of faith and morals.... John Paul II, continuing the constant teaching of the Church, has reiterated many times that those who are directly involved in lawmaking bodies have a 'grave and clear obligation to oppose' any law that attacks human life.

"For them, as for every Catholic, it is impossible to promote such laws or to vote for them" [1]

# "Presenting oneself to receive Holy Communion should be a conscious decision, based on a reasoned judgment regarding one's worthiness to do so, according to the Church's objective criteria, asking such questions as: 'Am I in full communion with the Catholic Church? Am I guilty of grave sin? Have I incurred a penalty [e.g. excommunication, interdict] that forbids me to receive Holy Communion? Have I prepared myself by fasting for at least an hour?' The practice of indiscriminately presenting oneself to receive Holy Communion, merely as a consequence of being present at Mass, is an abuse that must be corrected." [2]

# "If we tell ourselves that the Church ought not to interfere in such matters, we cannot but answer: are we not concerned with the human being? Do not believers, by virtue of the great culture of their faith, have the right to make a pronouncement on all this? Is it not our duty to raise our voices to defend the human being, that creature who, precisely in the inseparable unity of body and spirit, is the image of God?" [3]

# "Among all the crimes which can be committed against life, procured abortion has characteristics making it particularly serious and deplorable" [Pope John Paul II, 'Evangelium vitae,' n.58].

# In treating the evil of procured abortion, Pope John Paul II concluded: "No circumstance, no purpose, no law whatsoever can ever make licit an act which is intrinsically illicit, since it is contrary to the Law of God which is written in every human heart, knowable by reason itself, and proclaimed by the Church" [Pope John Paul II, 'Evangelium vitae,' n.62d].

# "Laws, which authorize and promote abortion... [are] radically opposed not only to the good of the individual but also to the common good; as such they are completely lacking in authentic juridical validity. Disregard for the right to life, precisely because it leads to the killing of the person whom society exists to serve, is what most directly conflicts with the possibility of achieving the common good. Consequently, a civil law authorizing abortion or euthanasia ceases by that very fact to be a true, morally binding civil law. [Pope John Paul II, 'Evangelium vitae,' n.72].

# "To claim the right to abortion, infanticide and euthanasia, and to recognize that right in law, means to attribute to human freedom a perverse and evil significance: that of an absolute power over others and against others. This is the death of true freedom: 'Truly, truly, I say to you, every one who commits sin is a slave to sin'" Jn 8:34 [Pope John Paul II, 'Evangelium vitae,' n.20].

# "The Church's custom shows that it is necessary for each person to examine himself at depth, and that anyone who is conscious of grave sin should not celebrate or receive the Body of the Lord without prior sacramental confession, except for grave reason when the possibility of confession is lacking; in this case he will remember that he is bound by the obligation of making an act of perfect contrition, which includes the intention to confess as soon as possible. Moreover, the Church has drawn up norms aimed at fostering the frequent and fruitful access of the faithful to the Eucharistic table and at determining the objective conditions under which Communion may not be given [Ecclesia de Eucharistia n. 42]. It is certainly best that all who are participating in the celebration of Holy Mass with the necessary dispositions should receive Communion. Nevertheless, it sometimes happens that Christ's faithful approach the altar as a group indiscriminately.

"It pertains to the Pastors prudently and firmly to correct such an abuse." [4]

# "Abortion and euthanasia are thus crimes which no human law can claim to legitimize. There is no obligation in conscience to obey such laws; instead there is a grave and clear obligation to oppose them by conscientious objection. From the very beginnings of the Church, the apostolic preaching reminded Christians of their duty to obey legitimately constituted public authorities [cf. Rom 13:1-7; 1 Pet 2:13-14], but at the same time it firmly warned that 'we must obey God rather than men' [Acts 5:29]. ... It is precisely from obedience to God -to whom alone is due that fear which is acknowledgment of his absolute sovereignty — that the strength and the courage to resist unjust human laws are born. It is the strength and the courage of those prepared even to be imprisoned or put to the sword, in the certainty that this is what makes for 'the endurance and faith of the saints' [Rev 13:10].

"In the case of an intrinsically unjust law, such as a law permitting abortion or euthanasia, it is therefore never licit to obey it, or to take part in a propaganda campaign in favor of such a law, or vote for it" [Pope John Paul II, 'Evangelium vitae,' n.73].

# "The inviolability of the person, which is a reflection of the absolute inviolability of God, finds its primary and fundamental expression in the inviolability of human life. Above all, the common outcry, which is justly made on behalf of human rights — for example, the right to health, to home, to work, to family, to culture — is false and illusory if the right to life, the most basic and fundamental right and the condition of all other personal rights, is not defended with maximum determination . . . everyone has the mission and responsibility of acknowledging the personal dignity of every human being and of defending the right to life, some lay faithful are given particular title to this task: such as parents, teachers, health workers and the many who hold economic and political power." [5]

# "Can we allow access to Eucharistic communion to those who deny the human and Christian principles and values? The responsibility of the politicians and legislators is great. So-called personal option cannot be separated from the socio-political duty. It is not a 'private' problem; the acceptance of the Gospel, of the Magisterium and of right reasoning is needed! As for all, even for politicians and legislators the word of God holds true: 'Therefore anyone who eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily... is eating and drinking his own condemnation'" [1 Cor 11:27-29]. [6]

# "The Church's teaching on the intrinsic evil of procured abortion forbids the destruction of human beings from the moment of fertilization through every stage of their development. Therefore, one cannot justify a vote for a candidate who promotes intrinsically evil acts which erode the very foundation of the common good, such as abortion by appealing to that same candidate's opposition to war or capital punishment" [cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, nn. 2265 and 2309].

# "It would be sinful to cast a ballot for one who, in the judgment of the voters, would do grave public harm." [7]

# "I do believe that abortion is a great enough threat to our society to justify an Ordinary taking a strong stand against the candidacy of such a pro-abortion candidate as Barack Hussein Obama. An Ordinary [Bishop] need not name the candidate by name, as I have done, but surely the Ordinary possesses the literary skills to condemn the candidacy on moral grounds in such a way as to leave absolutely no doubt in the reader's mind as to the identity of the candidate whose candidacy is being condemned." [8]

# "There is only one thing that could be considered proportionate enough to justify a Catholic voting for a candidate who is known to be pro-abortion, and that is the protection of innocent human life. That may seem to be contradictory, but it is not.

"Consider the case of a Catholic voter who must choose between three candidates: candidate (A, Kerry) who is completely for abortion-on-demand, candidate (B, Bush) who is in favor of very limited abortion, i.e., in favor of greatly restricting abortion and candidate (C, Peroutka), a candidate who is completely against abortion but who is universally recognized as being unelectable.

"The Catholic voter cannot vote for candidate (A, Kerry) because that would be formal cooperation in the sin of abortion if that candidate were to be elected and assist in passing legislation, which would remove restrictions on, abortion-on-demand.

"The Catholic can vote for candidate (C, Peroutka) but that will probably only help ensure the election of candidate (A, Kerry).

"Therefore the Catholic voter has a proportionate reason to vote for candidate (B, Bush) since his vote may help to ensure the defeat of candidate (A, Kerry) and may result in the saving of some innocent human lives if candidate (B, Bush) is elected and introduces legislation restricting abortion-on-demand. In such a case, the Catholic voter would have chosen the lesser of two evils, which is morally permissible under these circumstances." [9]

# Radio Ad — Voice says: "This is Bishop Rene H. Gracida, reminding all Catholics that they must vote in this election with an informed conscience. A Catholic cannot be said to have voted in this election with a good conscience if they have voted for a pro-abortion candidate. Barack Hussein Obama is a pro-abortion candidate." [10]

# "Certainly, it is never right to vote for a candidate in order to promote the immoral practices he or she endorses and supports. In such a case, the voter, who assists the candidate in fulfilling his or her agenda by getting into office, intends the same evil endorsed and promoted by the candidate. According to Catholic moral teaching, assisting another to achieve evil in this fashion is called formal cooperation, which is never morally permissible." [11]

# "But, there is no element of the common good, no morally good practice, that a candidate may promote and to which a voter may be dedicated, which could justify voting for a candidate who also endorses and supports the deliberate killing of the innocent, abortion, embryonic stem-cell research, euthanasia, human cloning or the recognition of a same-sex relationship as legal marriage. These elements are so fundamental to the common good that they cannot be subordinated to any other cause, no matter how good." [12]

# "My fellow citizens of the United States of America should be deeply concerned about any candidate for the presidency who supports legislation which permits the destruction of human life at its very beginning, the killing of babies in the womb, or legislation which violates the integrity of marriage and family life. The safeguarding and promoting of human life, from the moment of its inception, and of the integrity of marriage must be the fundamental planks of any political agenda. A good citizen must support and vote for the candidate who most supports the inalienable dignity of innocent and defenseless life, and the integrity of marriage. To do otherwise, is to participate, in some way, in the culture of death which pervades the life of the nation and has led to so much violence, even in the home and in educational institutions." [13]

# "I'm not telling anybody how to vote in this sense: I'm not telling them for whom they should vote. But I am telling them how to vote in the sense of what are the moral requirements for the right exercise of the right to vote. In other words, I'm setting forth for them the moral considerations of which they have to take note in voting. But I'm not telling them for whom they should vote. People have to read the pastoral letter — there isn't anything in the pastoral letter which is new; it's all what the Church has taught perennially. Then it's a matter of their conscience. In that sense, I suppose to put it simply, I'm telling them how to vote in the sense that I'm telling to vote according to their conscience and helping them to form that conscience correctly. That's my obligation as a bishop in such serious matters to present the Church's teaching." [14]

# "Unfortunately, when candidates for office in these United States make bold assertions that they have every intention of working to assure that the alleged right of a woman to kill her pre-born child is either preserved or even expanded, many Catholics seem to think that it would be morally acceptable to vote for such a candidate as long as they somehow miraculously excised the candidate's pro-abortion mindset out of the equation. A vote for such a candidate, like it or not, is likewise a vote for the firmly held abortion position; it is inseparable from the person. Just as a vote for a genocidal maniac is a vote for genocide and a vote for the avowed torturer is a vote for torture and a vote for the indiscriminant target of innocent women and children is a vote for such targeting so a vote for a promoter of abortion, when there is another less evil alternative available, is a vote for abortion." [15]

# "It is a tragic irony that "pro-choice" candidates have come to support homicide [abortion] — the gravest injustice a society can tolerate — in the name of "social justice.... A person who supports permissive abortion laws, however, rejects the truth that innocent human life may never be destroyed. This profound moral failure runs deeper and is more corrupting of the individual, and of the society, than any error in applying just war criteria to particular cases...some evils, such as abortion and euthanasia in particular, take precedence over other forms of violence and abuse. While the Church assists the State in the promotion of a just society, its primary concern is to assist men and women in achieving salvation. For this reason, it is incumbent upon bishops to correct Catholics who are in error regarding these matters. Furthermore, public officials who are Catholic and who persist in public support for abortion and other intrinsic evils should not partake in or be admitted to the sacrament of Holy Communion [canon 915]. As I have said before, I will be vigilant on this subject" ['A Pastoral Letter from Bishop Martino,' by Joseph F. Martino, Bishopof the Diocese of Scranton, read at all Masses on Respect Life Sunday, October 4-5, 2008].

If you would like to send Fr. Newman a note of encouragement for continuing to do what the Church intends him to do, you may contact him at:

E-mail: jayscottnewman@mac.com
St. Mary's Catholic Church [founded in l852 and dedicated to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart of Jesus]
111 Hampton Avenue, Greenville, SC 29601
Phone: 864-679-4101 personal line
Phone: 864-271-8422
www.stmarysgvl.org

For further reading: Catholic author George Weigel in his book 'Letters to a Young Catholic' pointed out that Fr. Newman and his rapidly growing St. Mary's parish is a bright beacon in the continuing wasteland of the post-Vatican II devastation. And go here to read Fr. Newman's gobsmacking essay, 'Worshiping the Lord in the Beauty of Holiness.'

Please go to 'Part One' to examine what the Catholic Church, its Popes and its Bishops, teach us about its Church members wrongly voting for pro-abortion politicians.

NOTES:

[1] "Doctrinal Note on some questions regarding the participation of Catholics in political life," by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, November 24, 2002. This document summarizes Church teachings on issues of freedom of conscience, pluralism and political activity.

[2] 'Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion. General Principles,' Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger to US Bishops, June 2004; cf Instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum, nos. 81, 83.

[3] Address of His Holiness Benedict XVI to the Members of the Roman Curia at the Traditional Exchange of Christmas Greetings, Clementine Hall, Friday, December 22, 2006.

[4] n. 81-83, Redemptionis Sacramentum, March 25, 2004, addresses abuses of the Liturgy in its 185 paragraphs; cf Code of Canon Law, c. 915; Cf. Code of Canon Law, can. 916; cf. Ecumenical Council of Trent, Session XIII, 11 October 1551, Decree on the Most Holy Eucharist, Chapter 7: DS 1646-1647; Pope John Paul II, Encyclical Letter, Ecclesia de Eucharistia, n. 36: AAS 95 (2003) pp. 457-458; S. Congregation of Rites, Instruction, Eucharisticum mysterium, n. 35: AAS 59 (1967) p. 561.

[5] "Pope John Paul II elaborates in his 1988 apostolic exhortation, The Vocation and the Mission of the Lay Faithful in the Church and in the World [Christifideles Laici]; cf Living the Gospel of Life n. 19.

[6] H. Em. Card. Alfonso López Trujillo, President of the Pontifical Council for the Family, Eucharistic Coherence of Politicians and Legislators, Pontifical Council for the Family, Intervention of H.E. Cardinal Alfonso López Trujillo at the XI Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops, Vatican City, October 7, 2005.

[7] The New Confraternity Edition: 'Revised Baltimore Catechism and Mass,' No. 3, New York: Benziger Brothers, 1949, p. 145.

[8] Bishop Rene Henry Gracida, Bishop emeritus of the diocese of Corpus Christi, TX, October 29, 2008, response to commentary online.

[9] Statement, Bishop Rene Henry Gracida, 'Voting for Pro-Abortion Candidates,' August 11, 2004.

[10] October 24, 2008, Bishop Rene Henry Gracida, Bishop emeritus of the diocese of Corpus Christi, TX, radio ad in English and Spanish, republished by Slatts.blogspot.com.

[11] 'On Our Civic Responsibility for the Common Good,' n. 37, Archbishop Raymond L. Burke, October 1, 2004.

[12] 'On Our Civic Responsibility for the Common Good,' n.39, Archbishop Raymond L. Burke, October 1, 2004].

[13] Prefect of the Apostolic Signatura of the Holy See, Archbishop Raymond Leo Burke, interview Inside the Vatican interview, November 3, 2008.

[14] Archbishop Raymond Burke, then Bishop of LaCrosse, interview with 'Inside the Vatican,' October 5, 2004, regarding his pastoral, 'On Our Civic Responsibility for the Common Good.'

[15] 'As you form conscience, know not all issues are equal,' October 16, 2008, by Bishop Robert Vasa, Bishop of Diocese of Baker.[/quote]

[hérisson]

[quote name='Dave' post='1704020' date='Nov 18 2008, 06:32 PM']Sometimes the most loving thing you can do for someone is slap 'em upside the head.[/quote]

How about starting with yourself ?

Edited November 18, 2008 by hérisson

[hérisson]

[quote name='Dave' post='1704034' date='Nov 18 2008, 06:36 PM']Zwergel88 had been corrected numerous times on these boards by various individuals (this has gone on ever since long before you joined Phatmass), and she still wouldn't listen (note that zwergel88 is a she, not a he).[/quote]

How can you accuse somebody else for not listening if you refuse to do so ?

[mortify]

The Catechism says the following:

[color="#0000FF"]1790 A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience. If he were deliberately to act against it, he would condemn himself. Yet it can happen that moral conscience remains in ignorance and makes erroneous judgments about acts to be performed or already committed.

1791 [u][b]This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility.[/b][/u] This is the case when a man "takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin."59 [u][b]In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.[/b][/u]

1792 Ignorance of Christ and his Gospel, bad example given by others, enslavement to one's passions, [u][b]assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience[/b][/u],[u][b] rejection of the Church's authority and her teaching[/b][/u], lack of conversion and of charity: these can be at the source of errors of judgment in moral conduct.

1793 If - on the contrary - the ignorance is invincible, or the moral subject is not responsible for his erroneous judgment, the evil committed by the person cannot be imputed to him. [u][b]It remains no less an evil, a privation, a disorder. One must therefore work to correct the errors of moral conscience.[/b][/u]

1794 A good and pure conscience is enlightened by true faith, for charity proceeds at the same time "from a pure heart and a good conscience and sincere faith."
[/color]

[mortify]

The Catechism on cooperation:
[color="#0000FF"]
1868 Sin is a personal act. Moreover,[u][b] we have a responsibility for the sins committed by others when we cooperate in them[/b][/u]:

- by participating directly and voluntarily in them;

- by ordering, advising, praising, or approving them;

- by not disclosing or not hindering them when we have an obligation to do so;

- by protecting evil-doers.

1869 Thus sin makes men accomplices of one another and causes concupiscence, violence, and injustice to reign among them. Sins give rise to social situations and institutions that are contrary to the divine goodness. "Structures of sin" are the expression and effect of personal sins. They lead their victims to do evil in their turn. In an analogous sense, they constitute a "social sin."[/color]

Voting for a pro-abortion candidate instead of a pro-life candidate probably falls under the third way of cooperating, "by not disclosing or not hindering them when we have an obligation to do so."

Edited November 18, 2008 by mortify

[Dave]

[quote name='hérisson' post='1704201' date='Nov 18 2008, 05:18 PM']How about starting with yourself ?[/quote]

I'm not the one defending sinful behavior; you are. So come over here . . .

[Dave]

[quote name='hérisson' post='1704210' date='Nov 18 2008, 05:23 PM']How can you accuse somebody else for not listening if you refuse to do so ?[/quote]


More making rash judgments on your part. I have listened very much. But the points people such as yourself, zwergel88, et al have made to defend their choices are invalid and wrong. Face it -- you're not listening yourself. If you call yourself Catholic, you're supposed to call right right and wrong wrong. But that's not what you're doing. It could be said you're making yourself an accessory to Catholic Obama voters' sin by defending the wrong done. Get thee to confession ASAP.

Edited November 18, 2008 by Dave

[Dave]

[quote name='Fr. Bruno' post='1702559' date='Nov 16 2008, 12:04 PM']Luke 6:39-42[/quote]

Oh yeah, I forgot to mention something when I previously addressed this post. Father, you of all people should know better than to defend or make excuses for the sinful behavior of others. So that passage turns right around on you.

[hérisson]

[quote name='mortify' post='1704265' date='Nov 19 2008, 12:07 AM']The Catechism on cooperation:
[color="#0000FF"]
1868 Sin is a personal act. Moreover,[u][b] we have a responsibility for the sins committed by others when we cooperate in them[/b][/u]:

- by participating directly and voluntarily in them;

- by ordering, advising, praising, or approving them;

- by not disclosing or not hindering them when we have an obligation to do so;

- by protecting evil-doers.

1869 Thus sin makes men accomplices of one another and causes concupiscence, violence, and injustice to reign among them. Sins give rise to social situations and institutions that are contrary to the divine goodness. "Structures of sin" are the expression and effect of personal sins. They lead their victims to do evil in their turn. In an analogous sense, they constitute a "social sin."[/color]

Voting for a pro-abortion candidate instead of a pro-life candidate probably falls under the third way of cooperating, "by not disclosing or not hindering them when we have an obligation to do so."[/quote]


Thank you for presenting your post in a peaceful and polite way.

The question we're discussing here is this one : has zwergel88 committed a mortal sin by voting for Obama, so that she has to abstain from receiving Holy Communion ?

On cooperation with regards to voting, there are two other principles to consider :
1) A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of the candidate’s permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia.
2) When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favour of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons.

If you can prove (by quoting zwergel88) that the first principle applies to zwergel88, then I'll admit you're right. As far as I understand her explanation, she just thought voting for Obama was the right thing to do (which is a mistake, of course). In that case, I think we cannot say that she was aware of the evil caracter of her act, and we can thus not conclude that she committed a mortal sin.

Note that the second principle does not concern mortal sin in itself, but rather the question whether that kind of cooperation can be permitted.

Edited November 20, 2008 by hérisson