Obama wins the Catholic vote.

The most pro-abortion person ever to be in the White House; the person who has launched the most significant assault on religious liberty in this country since our founding… won the Catholic vote.

That adequately explains why I am entirely and completely unimpressed with the anger of the pastor at a parish who called me, irate that a group of volunteers I organized were putting pro-life leaflets on cars in his parish parking lot. He complained about how much difficulty it will cause him.

Difficulty? What difficulty? He didn’t know we were going to do it, so there is no possibility of legal difficulties.

The material was entirely consistent with the Church’s teaching on life and a Catholic’s obligations vis-a-vis voting and the “non-negotiables,” so it couldn’t possibly be controversial among his parishoners, could it?

One of the most powerful spots on the planet. Souls can be emboldened for the good or scandalized. Minds can be enlightened or confused. Hearts can be set afire or made lukewarm.

I mean, if his parishoners are well informed on the issues and well educated by their teachers in the faith concerning what is and what is not negotiable then the worst problem would be a few leaflets fluttering around in the breeze after parishoners left.

Perhaps a few parishoners who refused to accept the teaching of the Church might be upset, and perhaps a few might call him, thinking he had orchestrated the leafletting. In that case, it seems like a grand opportunity to collect a wayward sheep and coax him back to the fold, while assuring the parishoner that he, the pastor, had absolutely nothing to do with, nor knowledge of, the leaflets being distributed. So that’s not really a difficulty—it’s his job.

I’m flush out of what the difficulty might be. Whatever it is, I’ll wager that it pales in comparison to the difficulty a child in the womb feels during an abortion. Anyhow, I think you know where I’m going with this.

The Romney campaign was horrid at Hispanic/Latino outreach, which accounts for them not getting much of that vote. But not voting for one guy doesn’t mean one automatically votes for the other guy. If Catholics of any ethnicity cast a vote forĀ a politician as antithetical to Catholic non-negotiables as Obama, that strongly suggests a failure on the part of those charged with forming the faithful on their faith and the duties the faith requires.

That sort of failure doesn’t happen just in the weeks and months leading up to the election, it goes back years.

All the faithful have a duty to educate themselves and one another on responsible citizenship, but if the shepherds do not lead the sheep scatter. There will, naturally, be some sheep who persist in their error and refuse to be led—we still have free will, pride, and concupiscence; and God ratifies our choices. But those ought to be the exception, not the majority. Sheep who ignore the shepherd and persistently leave the fold get eaten by wolves.

Christ said we are to be the salt of the earth, to season it, draw out its goodness. But if salt loses its flavor it is useless. It seasons nothing. It is worthy only to be cast out and trodden underfoot.

6,046 views

Categories:Uncategorized

76 thoughts on “Obama wins the Catholic vote.

  1. Susan says:

    It is very disturbing the numbers of ‘Catholics’ whose votes were purchased by an administration who believes in promoting infanticide, and redistribution of resources not only to the ‘havenots’ or cannots, but also to the ‘will nots’, and seeks to divert funds to a corrupt and dishonest few. There is something very wrong and hypocritical about someone calling themselves a Catholic and voting this president another term. He’ll never be my president. Not ever.

    1. miles01 says:

      Susan, its very disturbing that YOU think votes were purchased by anyone other than the repubs. The repubs used code words to indicate to their base that minorities are asking for handouts, NOT TRUE. Second, as a catholic, i have FREE will to vote and determine who I will vote for and why. The corrupt and dishonest few are the repubs that want to dismantle the unions, change social security, deny health care to those that cannot afford it.
      I feel for you. The thought of having a mormon, whose grandfather had how many wives(so much for traditional marriage) and that guy from up north that wants to get rid of every program that helps the common man, is a nightmare for most of us.
      If from what you have written, you can still call yourself a catholic, guess what, I am more than happy to call myself one.
      thanks

  2. catholicmidwest says:

    The “catholic” vote. Wink. Wink. About 80% of self-proclaimed Catholics don’t even bother to show up for mass once a week, which makes them what? I don’t know.

  3. mike ogma says:

    President Obama has taken an oath to “…preserve protect and defend the Constitution.” Our Constitution, protecting “…Liberty for all,” and “…equal protections of the laws.” If your allegiance belongs to Rome rather than our Constitution…

    1. Cleveland Jones says:

      Mike, I’ll take both!

  4. Paul C says:

    Reading through this, I can’t hep but think that this is a back to basic discussion: Why does the Church teach what it does? From a big picture perspective, the Church has one reason to exist: to help people get to heaven. So how does its particular teachings on abortion, and, same sex marriage, help people get to heaven? Lets go through them:

    Abortion: the Church teaches that Abortion is always intrinsically evil because it murders an innocent child and murder is always a mortal sin, separating one from the state of Grace. Without reconciliation, one who murders will not gain heaven. This is clear. So what about the counter arguments. What if the woman got pregnant because of rape or incest, where getting pregnant was not her choice? Well, we can and should feel compassion for the woman, but we must also feel compassion for the child, who also had no choice in the conception. The moral choice, if the woman doesn’t feel she could care for this child, is to give him or her the gift of birth and then put it up for adoption. We are all called to love, even under difficult circumstances and we should give the woman and the child all the support they need to do this. What about the argument that a fetus is not a child? The Church teaches that life begins at conception and clearly this is a biological truth. While it is true that the fetus can not sustain itself, it is equally true that the child will not be able to sustain itself for quite a few years after birth as well. Again, we are all called to love

    Same Sex marriage: The Church unambiguously teaches that marriage is a life long sacrament (covenant agreement) between a man and a woman and God, where all will work together to conceive and raise children. It also teaches that sex is sacred because its purpose is to give life and that sex outside the confines of marriage is sinful because it fails to take into account the sacredness of the act and the responsibility that it entails. There is no marriage between members of the same sex because they can not conceive and bear children together, the very purpose of marriage. So what about the counter argument that sterile heterosexual couples can marry? Well, of course they can because there is always a chance, no matter how remote, that the sterilization can be reversed. What about elderly couples? Well, remember, Elizabeth was elderly when she concieved St John the baptist. Well, how is their situation different than same sex couples? The simply don’t have a biological path to have sex and conceive. What is deemed homosexual sex is simply a poor simulation of the real thing and the bible is very clear that such acts are immoral. Why? Because the body is sacred and must be used for the reasons God intended. But should we not be sympathetic to those who have same sex attraction? Sure we should. We are called to love everyone. But how? We should definitely treat them the same as everyone else.

    Doesn’t this mean that we should allow them to marry whoever they want? Well, no it doesn’t. We also don’t allow men to marry their mothers or sisters, even if they are attracted to each other. Those people feel just as put upon as those with same sex attraction, yet few would support their marriage. Doesn’t that mean we are legislating morality? Of course, we are. All laws are legislating morality. So how do we define morality? By what is in the common good. So why isn’t same sex marriage in the common good? Because it leads people into sin. How do we know that? Because the Church teaches it. So how do we know the Church is right? Because the Church was instituted by Jesus for the very purpose of teaching the way to heaven. How do we know the Church didn’t fall from the path? Because Jesus said it would be protected from error by the Holy Spirit. What if we don’t believe that? The truth isn’t defined by the vote of the people. Truth is eternal. What if we leave the Church? That doesn’t change the truth.

    1. Julie T. says:

      Thank you, Paul C., for your very thoughtful contribution here.

    2. miles01 says:

      Paul, I think you probably need to take it back ever further to the basics. Before the written old testament, how did folks get married. Was there marriage? Who married the couples? The answer is of course, a man visited his neighbor, offered a cow, a few chickens and coins and received his neighbors daughter in return. They later produced children and the saga continued. Marriage as an institution appears later even after the old testament is complied.
      So your opinion that marriage has existed since the beginning of time is rather nonsense.
      To say that the Church is protected by the Holy Spirit from error, lets put it this way,
      take a look at the church during the middle ages. Most popes were either married, had mistresses and had children. In fact two popes were sons of earlier popes. Also factual, the real reason for the rule changes against married priests was upon death, property would be divided between his offspring, rather than revert to the holy see.
      Finally, I resent the label of Democrats as the party of death. The repubs started two wars and account for many deaths to our own as well of others. They have no regard to the poor, other than telling them that are responsible for being poor. The regard blacks and latinos as people demanding a government handout, although countless figures indicated that the majority of people on the dole are white. Instead of courting these minorities, they push them further away by their policies.
      Yes, i am catholic, I am a Democrat and finally I am pro-choice. Oh yes, I am also a black american, a veteran and a father. I choose all of the above and will continue to teach my children the information to make up their own minds on politics and religion.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

STAY CONNECTED


DON'T MISS A THING

Receive our updates via email.