Will "Faithful Citizenship" Win the Catholic Vote For Obama? by Deal W. Hudson

insidecatholic.com ^ | 10/27/08 | Deal W. Hudson

[Publius804]

Will "Faithful Citizenship" Win the Catholic Vote For Obama?

by Deal W. Hudson

10/27/08

If Obama wins on November 4 with the help of Catholic voters, the biggest factor in his favor will be the bishops' own document and Web site, "Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship."

I never thought it likely that Catholic voters could be persuaded to support a candidate with both the most extreme record on abortion and who favors gay marriage. Yet, barring a miracle, that paradox is only a week away: The New York Times is reporting Obama 22 points ahead among Catholic voters.

As I have watched the campaign unfold, especially Obama's outreach to Catholic voters, the USCCB document has played a decisive role. "Faithful Citizenship" provided Obama's Catholic supporters the escape clauses needed to convince Catholics they could vote for a pro-abortion candidate in "good conscience."

There are two major loopholes in the document. First, it states that Catholics are allowed to vote for a supporter of abortion rights so long as 1) they do not intend to support that position (34) or 2) there are offsetting "morally grave reasons" (35).

Many bishops have spoken out forcefully that the document is being abused. Bishop Robert Vasa, for example, points out that voting for a pro-abortion candidate is never justified when the opponent is pro-life. Similarly, Bishops Kevin Vann and Kevin Farrell insist there are no "'truly grave moral' or 'proportionate' reasons, singularly or combined, that could outweigh the millions of innocent human lives that are directly killed by legal abortion each year."

Obama's Catholic surrogates made little note of the corrections.

[massgopguy]

The New York Times “reporting” on Catholics? Please, 75% of the Editorial Board is Gay. They wouldn’t talk to a Catholic who attends Mass unless they were dressed as a Nun Clown. Where was their report on The March for Life? Where is their report on how the Knights of Columbus is growing while other service organizations shrink?

[wideawake]

Again, there is the "Catholic vote" - i.e. voters who identify themselves as Catholic.

There is also the Catholic vote - voters who attend Mass every Sunday, rain or shine, who read their Bible, who read their catechism, who say their rosary.

The former group may be 66-38 Obama.

The latter group is likely 100% McCain.

I find it interesting that 36% of US Catholics bother to attend Mass and 38% of US Catholics are voting for McCain in this poll.

[Salvation]

I never thought it likely that Catholic voters could be persuaded to support a candidate with both the most extreme record on abortion and who favors gay marriage. Yet, barring a miracle, that paradox is only a week away: The New York Times is reporting Obama 22 points ahead among Catholic voters.

[Salvation]

Over 80 Bishops Say Abortion/Life Issues Defining Issues of Election [That's nearly half of the U. S. Bishops!]

[tbpiper]

Obama 22 points ahead among Catholic voters

Tast's voters who claim to be Catholic. My guess is that 22 points is made up of people were 'born' Catholic, attend church regularly twice a year (Christmas & Easter), were dragged to church eons ago when they young, or some combination there of.

The election cycle certainly has separated the sheep from the goats, both in matters of faith and politics.

[pallis]

Obama is an abomination who should be anathema to all good Catholics. That goes for all other Christians, Jews, people with two moral scruples to balance their brains.... Only a liberal reprobate would consider voting for Obama.

[TCH]

A Catholic may never vote for a candidate who supports abortion. To do so is to inccur excommunication “Latae Sentia” ... by one’s own hand. An official declaration of excommunication by the Church is not required. In voting for any candidate supporting abortion, euthanasia, cloning, or embrionic stem-cell research, the Catholic commits grave sin, via consent, defense, praise and or silence of the evil act.

Mortal sin is:
A sin of grave matter
Committed with full knowledge of the sinner
Committed with deliberate consent of the sinner

Nine ways to of being an accessory to another’s sin:

1. By Counsel
2. By Command
3. By Consent
4. By Concealment
5. By Defense of Evil Done
6. By Partaking
7. By Provocation
8. By Praise
9. By Silence

Numbers 3, 5, 8 and possibly 9 would figure here.

[ConservativeWarrior]

Hear, hear!

In a related NY Slimes story, 100% of 2004 "Catholic" presidential candidates supported themselves for the office.

[veritas2002]

I find it laughable that the New York Times is defining for us just who is a Catholic. It’s like me defining an idiot as someone who reads the NY Times.

[MEGoody]

If Obama wins on November 4 with the help of Catholic voters. . .

It just goes to show that those particular 'Catholic' voters do not believe the teachings of their own church.

[Godsgirl]

AMEN to that.

[RGPII]

I think a thread should be started as to where Catholics can send Prayer requests to the Almighty! I don’t have that much experience with such kinds of threads, I’ve never created a “vanity.”

http://www.lourdes-france.org/index.php?contexte=en&id=499&;

Is one.

Fatima accepts them, I think I’ve gone to Divine Mercy sites too and done it.

My apologies that this is off topic. I do wonder if that Lourdes France site has worked in the past. Oh, Giants won the Superbowl (just kidding).

[ardara]

As an active and involved Catholic voter I say the pro-McCain Catholic vote is going to be the big surprise of this election.

[lastchance]

This is from the Florida Conference of Catholic Bishops. I will let y’all mull over how misleading it is and why it could very well cause faithful Catholics to commit grave moral error.

http://www.informedcatholicvoter.com/questions_sample.cfm?RaceLevel=1

[steadfastconservative]

I disagree with Hudson. I think he is being overly critical of this document. After all, the bishops are saying that Catholics may vote for pro-abortion candidates only if there is some “morally grave” reason for doing so, which is hardly a blanket permission. In other words, there must be some issue as grave, not just as serious, as the abortion issue which would justify voting for someone who is pro-abortion. Indeed, the bishops have published a pamphlet this year on voting which acknowledges that while “Faithful Citizenship” does permit Catholics to vote for pro-abortion candidates when there are morally grave reasons for doing so, the bishops cannot imagine any other issue rising to the same level of moral gravity as that of the 49 million babies who have been killed by abortion.

I can understand why Hudson might have preferred that the bishops had written a less nuanced document and had simply categorically stated that no one may ever vote for a pro-abortion candidate but the simple fact of the matter is that Catholic moral theology is often nuanced.

If a majority of Catholics end up voting for Obama, thus guaranteeing his election, it won’t be because they bothered to read “Faithful Citizenship” and decided that there were “grave” reasons for voting for Obama but because they completely dismissed the whole issue of abortion. The sad fact of the matter is that many Catholics, specifically, the ones who don’t go to Mass regularly, just don’t care about what happens to the unborn. Why should they listen to what the Church says about abortion? After all, they don’t listen to the Church about anything else. Frankly, I’m tired of hearing these people described as Catholics since it’s pretty clear most of them lost their faith a long time ago.