Posted on 05/01/2013 6:54:27 AM PDT by marshmallow
Reading Sherry Weddell’s excellent Forming Intentional Disciples is making me think about the American church and what ails her. Can anybody deny that there is a sickness in the body ecclesia? When 50% of Catholics vote for a man who stoutly defends same sex marriage and partial birth abortion can we say that Catholics in America are okay?
I don’t think so.
Thus a series of posts on what’s killing Catholicism. All the words begin with the letter ‘C’. I can’t help it. I was brought up as a Biblical Evangelical and our pastors always used alliteration to make their points memorable.
The first problem is cultural catholicism. The Poles, Italians, Irish, French, Czech, German and more Catholics came here from the old country and the bishops reckoned the best thing to do with them all was to allow cultural parishes. So in the same town the Irish Catholics went to St Patrick’s and the Poles to St Stanislaus and the Italians to St Anthony of Padua. Geesh, a man in my parish who grew up in Reading, Pennsylvania said that when he was a boy a girl from his Czech parish fell in love with an Irish boy and the Irish priest wouldn’t marry them because it was a mixed marriage.
I’m all for cultural customs and so forth, but the problem is that the immigrant Catholics–in a foreign land–clung to their culture for security and happiness and part of that culture was their Catholicism. The didn’t distinguish their culture from their Catholicism. Then, after a few generations, when they were all really American and stopped being Italian or Irish or German they also stopped being Catholic. The Catholic faith wasn’t much deeper than Mama’s special spaghetti sauce or stories of the Blarney stone.
Of course they didn’t.........
(Excerpt) Read more at patheos.com ...
That is a standard reply, as it is a very convenient means of dealing with the majority of Western RCs being liberal, however, the problem is that Rome counts and treats them as members in life and in death, by which actions she interprets her laws on excommunication as meaning that impenitent souls as Teddy K. remain members.
Meanwhile,
"America is, and always has been, a liberal project. That's its fundamental problem. The "pursuit of happiness" is enshrined in the Declaration of Independence and is the major driving force behind the progressivist, liberal agenda.." "The pursuit of happiness" to increasing numbers of modern Americans, Catholic, non-Catholic, agnostic and atheist, means the pursuit of unrestrained sexual gratification and the disposal of its unfortunate products in the form of abortion, for instance.
This is a skewed understanding of what "pursuit of happiness" originally meant, which was not unrestrained sexual gratification etc., and in fact it was contrary to that.
"Without virtue, happiness cannot be." --Thomas Jefferson to Amos J. Cook, 1816. ME 14:405
"To suppose that any form of government will secure liberty or happiness without any virtue in the people, is a chimerical idea." James Madison
"The diminution of public virtue is usually attended with that of public happiness, and the public liberty will not long survive the total extinction of morals." Samuel Adams
...we have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. (From a letter John Adams wrote on 11 October 1798 to the officers of the First Brigade, Third Division, of the Massachusetts Militia).ion of the Militia of Massachusetts,” October 11, 1798)
There is no truth more thoroughly established than that there exists in theeconomy and course of nature an indissoluble union between virtue and happiness. -GEORGE WASHINGTON, First Inaugural Address, Apr. 30, 1789
"The aggregate happiness of the society, which is best promoted by the practice of a virtuous policy, is, or ought to be, the end of all government" -George Washington
Washington's Farewell Address, 1797 — Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. . . . And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. (Farewell Address, 1797; http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/washing.asp)
As another Catholic said,
The Founding Fathers did say the "pursuit of happiness" is an unalienable right. I often like to point out they did not say the "pursuit of pleasure". (http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=521055)
The "pursuit of happiness" is seem as coming from Locke in a 1690 essay "Concerning Human Understanding" and used by Jefferson, with the Greek word for “happiness” being "eudaimoniam" which invokes "Greek and Roman ethics in which eudaimonia is linked to aretê, the Greek word for “virtue” or “excellence.” In the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle wrote, “the happy man lives well and does well; for we have practically defined happiness as a sort of good life and good action.” Happiness is not, he argued, equivalent to wealth, honor, or pleasure. It is an end in itself, not the means to an end." (http://hnn.us/articles/46460.html)
In any case, the founders did not interpret the "pursuit of happiness" as hedonism, but in contrast to the oppression of England, it meant freedom to pursue happiness by lawful virtuous means .
"Know ye not that they which run in a race run all, but one receiveth the prize? So run, that ye may obtain." (1 Corinthians 9:24)
This is no to say that the Founders were wholly Biblical in thier ideology, but while the motive for this pursuit must to be to please God according to His Word, yet the founders did not intend the "pursuit of happiness" to be that of immorality, and instead passed laws against such.
However, just as antinomians misconstrue Scripture to justify lawlessness, so modern revisions supposed the founders meant to sanction porn under the 1st Amendment, and were hostile to any sanction of religion.
As for stats, it is not how many voted each way but the percentage. The fact that many Catholics do not vote means apathy, and for a meaningful comparison this must be compared with how many evangelicals also did not vote, and how they could be expected to voted.
But as seen in more than one FR thread, the way some absolve Catholics from blame is to argue that about half of Catholics did not vote [citation needed], and then blame evangelicals for Romney's loss, as too many of them did not vote, for among those who did 79% voted for Romney - a higher % than any other religious group, even Mormons! So about half the Catholics are pouring on a fire while almost 80% of evangelicals are fighting it, but the latter it to be blamed for the loss of the house because too many stayed home like about half the Catholics.
Now here are many referenced stats:
72% of Catholics said that the will of the American people should have more influence than the Bible on US law, as compared to 63% of the general public. Pew Research Center, "Pragmatic Americans Liberal and Conservative on Social Issues," August 3, 2006, http://people-press.org/reports/pdf/283.pdf (accessed June 24, 2008).
In 2011, 70% of [white?] evangelicals considered themselves Republican or leaned toward that party, versus 24% Democrat. http://www.pewforum.org/Politics-and-Elections/Trends-in-Party-Identification-of-Religious-Groups.aspx
48% of Catholics considered themselves Democrats or leaned toward that party, 43% Republican or leaned thereto. ^
47% of white Catholics identified with or leaned toward the Democratic Party, while 46% supported the GOP in the mid-September [2012] poll [up from 41% in 2008], while 72% of white evangelicals identified with the GOP. http://www.pewforum.org/Race/Latinos-Religion-and-Campaign-2012.aspx#president
37% of Catholics were registered as Democrats [2007], 27% Republican, and 31% as Independents. Aggregated Pew Research Surveys, 2007. http://pewforum.org/docs/?DocID=295#ideology
34% of weekly Mass attending Catholics are Democrats, and an additional 19% are not affiliated with a party but lean toward the Democrats (53% identifying or leaning as Democrats). 28% of weekly attenders are Republicans and an additional 17% lean toward being a Republican (43 percent identifying or leaning as Republicans). Thus Democrats have a 10% point edge among weekly attendees, Catholics who attend Mass less than weekly are even more likely to be a Democrat rather than a Republican. http://cara.georgetown.edu/NewsandPress/PressReleases/pr061808.pdf
91% of faculty and administrators from America’s top 23 Catholic universities who contributed to presidential campaigns in 2012 gave to President Obama. 89.6% of all 928 donors contributed to Obama, versus 10.3% who gave to Romney. Employees of the Catholic schools contributed $449,229 to President Obama while giving just $70,304 to Republican nominee Mitt Romney. Of the 826 individuals who donated over $200 to the two major candidates, 748 gave to President Obama’s campaign while 78 contributed to Romney. Based on official Federal Election Commission data made available by OpenSecrets.org; http://www.campusreform.org/blog/?ID=4529
Based upon exit polling, 74 percent of Evangelicals voted for McCain in 2008, with 25 percent for Obama. (Another measure which put the percentage of US evangelicals at 23 percent, with 73 percent voting for McCain, 26 percent for Obama.) http://pewforum.org/docs/?DocID=367
Catholics overall supported Obama over McCain by a nine-point margin (54% vs. 45%) ^
Exit polls in 2008 reported that weekly churchgoing Catholics voted for John McCain over Barack Obama, by just 50 percent to 49 percent. Weekly Protestant church attendees voted for McCain over Barack Obama 66 to 32 percent. http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/churchgoing_catholics_chose_mccain_over_obama/
In the 2012 election (preliminary exit-poll analysis), white Evangelicals (23% of the electorate) voted 79%/20% Romney/Obama; Protestants overall (53% of the electorate) voted 57%/42%; black Protestants (9% of the electorate) and other Christian voted 5%/95%; Catholics overall (25% of the electorate) voted 48%/50%; white Catholics (18% of the electorate) voted 59%/40%; and Hispanic Catholics (5% of the electorate) voted 21%/75% Romney/Obama http://www.pewforum.org/Politics-and-Elections/How-the-Faithful-Voted-2012-Preliminary-Exit-Poll-Analysis.aspx
Weekly Church attendees (28% of the electorate) voted 57%/39% Romney/Obama; more than weekly (14% of the electorate) voted 63%/36% and “never” attendees (17% of the electorate) were at 34%/62% Romney/Obama. ^
According to Barna, in 2012 45% of the people who voted in November indicated that their faith affected how they voted. 72% of Evangelicals, 34% non-evangelical born again voters, and 19% of Catholics, 17% of non-Christian faith said their faith affected their presidential preference a lot. 9% of voters overall and 10% of evangelicals felt strongly that Mr. Romney's Mormon connection diminished their likelihood of supporting him. http://www.barna.org/culture-articles/595-the-role-of-faith-in-the-2012-election
Evangelicals supported Mr. Romney 81% to 17% over Mr. Obama (a smaller percentage for the Republican candidate than in previous years). Born again Christians who are not evangelicals supported Romney 56% to 43% over the incumbent. Catholics supported Mr. Obama by 57% to 42% — the largest margin since Bill Clinton topped Bob Dole by 21 points in 1996. Protestant overall voted 57% to 42% in favor of Mr. Romney. ^
Notional Christians (the largest segment of voters and who consider themselves to be Christian but are not evangelical or born again) voted 57% to 41% in favor of Mr. Obama. 68% of Skeptics and 69% of non-Christian faiths (14% of total voters) also voted for the Democratic candidate. ^
1% of Evangelicals, 10% of non-evangelical born again voters, 14% of Notional Christians and 33% of Skeptics said they were politically liberal. ^
48% of voters overall, 54% of Notional Christians, 53% of Catholics, and just 14% of Evangelicals agreed that the United States will be better off four years from now than it is today. 64% of voters overall said they would prefer that the presidential campaign be decided by the popular vote rather than Electoral votes. ^
Latinos make up about 40 percent of all U.S. Catholics; 70 percent of Latinos are Catholic; 23 percent of Latinos are Protestant or “other Christian;” 37 percent of the U.S. Latino population (14.2 million) self-identifies as “born-again” or evangelical (26% as born again); This figure includes Catholic charismatics, who constitute 22 percent of U.S. Latino Catholics; http://www.nhclc.org/news/latino-religion-us-demographic-shifts-and-trend
In 2007, 68% of Latinos identified as Catholics, two-thirds being immigrants. 42% did not graduate from high school. 46% have a household income of less than $30,000 per year - lower than that of other religious traditions. The Latino electorate was overwhelmingly Catholic (63%), and 70% of all Latino eligible voters who identified as Democrats were Catholics.
15% of Hispanics overall identified themselves as evangelicals. 64% have at least a high school diploma, and about 39% have a household income of less than $30,000 per year Among Hispanic eligible voters who were evangelicals, 37% said they considered themselves Republicans and 32% said they were Democrats. http://www.pewforum.org/uploadedfiles/Topics/Demographics/hispanics-religion-07-final-mar08.pdf
Among registered voters in 2007, 50% of white Evangelicals and 36% of Latino Evangelicals were Republican, 25% of the former and 36% of the latter were Democrats. 23% white Evangelical and 19% of Latino Evangelicals were Independents http://www.pewforum.org/uploadedfiles/Topics/Demographics/hispanics-religion-07-final-mar08.pdf
70% of Latino registered voters in 2012 identify with or lean toward the Democratic Party, while 22% identify with or lean toward the Republican Party. 81 percent of Latinos with no religious affiliation were Democrats or Democratic leaning. http://www.pewforum.org/Race/Latinos-Religion-and-Campaign-2012.aspx#president
73% of Latino Catholics surveyed said they favored Obama, versus 19% for Romney, while 50% of Latino evangelical Protestants (who accounted for 16% of all Latino registered voters) favored Obama, and 39% were for Romney. http://www.pewforum.org/Race/Latinos-Religion-and-Campaign-2012.aspx
Latino Catholics made up 57% of the electorate in 2012, and 71% are Democrats or lean toward the Democratic Party, while 21% identify with or lean toward the Republican Party. Among Latino evangelical voters, about half are Democrats or lean Democratic, while about a third are Republicans or lean toward the Republican Party. http://www.pewforum.org/Race/Latinos-Religion-and-Campaign-2012.aspx
White, non-Hispanic Catholics express about as much support for same-sex marriage as Hispanic Catholics do (53% and 54%, respectively). White evangelical Protestants are somewhat more opposed to gay marriage (76%) than are Hispanic evangelical Protestants (66%). ^
Latino Evangelicals are 50% more likely than those who are Catholics to identify with the Republican Party, and are significantly more conservative than Catholics on social issues, foreign policy issues and even in their attitudes toward the plight of the poor. http://pewforum.org/surveys/hispanic
54% of Hispanic Catholics believe that churches and other places of worship should be required to provide health care coverage that includes contraception, compared to 41% Hispanic Protestants. African American & Hispanic Reproductive Issues Survey by the Public Religion Research Institute, July 2012
Black Catholics constituted 5% of the Catholic church (highly predominantly from the West at 11%, versus 4-6% elsewhere) in 2007, and 15% of evangelicals (based on denomination, and spread fairly evenly, even in the NE at 16%, but lowest in the West at 11%). http://www.pewforum.org/A-Religious-Portrait-of-African-Americans.aspx
Blacks constituted 13% of the electorate in 2012. http://www.resurgentrepublic.com/research/2012-the-year-changing-demographics-caught-up-with-republicans
77 percent of Black Protestants said they vote Democratic, whether they attended weekly services or not. 2008 The Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life.
For those in black Catholic churches, political affiliation or leaning in 2007 was 17%/74% Republican/Democrat, and 11%/76% for black evangelical churches. Opposition to homosexuality 37% by black Catholics and 58% by black evangelicals. Opposition to abortion was 35% by black Catholics and 53% by black evangelicals. 66% of black evangelicals and 36% of black Catholics say they attend services at least weekly. http://www.pewforum.org/A-Religious-Portrait-of-African-Americans.aspx
22% of Asian-Americans are Protestants and 19% are Catholic (while 26% are unaffiliated, with 52% of Chinese being so). .http://www.pewforum.org/Asian-Americans-A-Mosaic-of-Faiths-overview.aspx
47% of Asian-American Protestants are or lean toward the Republican party, versus 36% Democrat. Asian-American evangelicals were at 56%/28%. Asian-American Catholics were at 42%/41% (Hindu Asian-Americans 9%/72% Republican/Democrat). ^
76% of Asian-American evangelical Protestants go to services at least once a week, followed by Catholics at 60%. Opposition to abortion and homosexuality is likewise higher among the former. ^
71% of Evangelicals, 35% of Protestants and 25% of Catholics said that a candidates position on abortion would have a lot of influence on their decision of who to vote for in 2012. Likewise 63% of evangelicals, 35% of Protestants and 19% of Catholics and said a candidates position on homosexual marriage would have a lot of influence on their decision. Barna, April, 2011 http://www.barna.org/transformation-articles/482-voters-most-interested-in-issues-concerning-security-and-comfort-least-interested-in-moral-issues
73% of Catholics polled say they believe Catholic politicians are under no religious obligation to vote on issues the way the bishops recommend, with 75% disapproving of denying communion to Catholics who support legal abortion, while 70% of Catholics say that the views of Catholic bishops in the US are unimportant to them in deciding for whom to vote, and 69% of say they feel no obligation to vote against candidates who support abortion. Belden Russonello & Stewart, "Secular and Security-Minded: The Catholic Vote in Summer 2008," Catholics for Choice, July 2008. http://www.catholicvote.net/page7/page22/page22.html
According to a February, 2011 Pew forum survey, 44% of white evangelical Protestants agree with the Tea Party movement, with only 8% disagreeing, while 33% of white Catholics agree and 23% disagree. Only 12% of atheists/agnostics support it with 67% opposing. http://pewforum.org/Politics-and-Elections/Tea-Party-and-Religion.aspx
In 2011, 70% of white evangelicals favored the GOP (up from 65% in 2004), compared with 24% who favored the Democratic Party.
By 2011 the number of mainline Protestants favoring the Republican Party had jumped by six points to 51%, and Democratic support had dropped by six points to 39%. White mainline Protestants are now 12 points more likely to express support for the GOP than for the Democratic Party.
49% white Catholics in 2008 supported for the Democratic Party and 41% identified as Republican or said they leaned toward the GOP. By 2011, the figures were reversed, 42% expressed support for Democrats and 49% for Republicans.
White evangelicals under 30 are now more heavily Republican than those over 30 (82% vs. 69%). And among white non-Hispanic Catholics under age 30, support for the GOP has increased from 41% in 2008 to 54% in 2011.
In 2011, all basic groups (all Catholic, Protestants, Mormons, Jewish, atheist/agnostic) showed increased support for Republicans.
Religiously unaffiliated voters - the fastest growing block - 61% identified with or leaned toward the Democratic Party, versus 27% for Republicans. - http://www.pewforum.org/Politics-and-Elections/Trends-in-Party-Identification-of-Religious-Groups-affiliation.aspx
65% of Catholics supported a tax increase for the wealthiest Americans in 2006, up from 52 percent in 2002. Majorities of Catholics support issues traditionally considered planks of the Democratic Party platform: universal healthcare, pro-labor policies, access to abortion, and social welfare programs for the poor. http://cara.georgetown.edu/NewsandPress/PressReleases/pr061808.pdf
10% of Evangelical Protestants reside in the NE, 23% in the Midwest, 50% in the South, and 17% in the West. Catholics: 29% NE, 24% Midwest, 24% in the South, 23% in the West. “Muslim Americans: Middle Class and Mostly Mainstream,” Pew Research Center, 2007. http://religions.pewforum.org/comparisons#
The population of Massachusetts ranks as the most liberal, with Boston and Cambridge being the most liberal large cities (100,000 or more), followed by California. http://www.epodunk.com/top10/liberal/index.html
The 16 most Catholic states contain 24 of the most liberal cities. Excluding (Maryland 26th), predominately Roman Catholic states contain all but one (Seattle WA) of the 30 most liberal cities. Of states in which S. Baptists are the single largest denomination none (of the 30 cities) were found. (the term “liberal” being defined according to individual contributions to PACs, election returns and the number of homosexual households: http://www.epodunk.com/top10/liberal/index.html http://www.glenmary.org/grc/RCMS_2000/Catholic_findings.htm , http://www.adherents.com/rel_USA.html.
The highest percentages of residents who describe themselves as Christian are typically in the South, including: Shreveport, LA (98%), Birmingham (96%), Charlotte (96%), Nashville (95%), Greenville, SC / Asheville, NC (94%), New Orleans (94%), Indianapolis (93%), Lexington (93%), Roanoke-Lynchburg (93%), Little Rock (92%), and Memphis (92%). http://www.barna.org/faith-spirituality/435-diversity-of-faith-in-various-us-cities
73% of the populations of Charlotte and Shreveport held scripture in high regard, versus only 27% of the residents of Providence, Rhode Island [the most Catholic state] and San Francisco [the most homosexual large city]. ^
The lowest percentages of self-identified Christians inhabited the following markets: San Francisco (68%), Portland, Oregon (71%), Portland, Maine (72%), Seattle (73%), Sacramento (73%), New York (73%), San Diego (75%), Los Angeles (75%), Boston (76%), Phoenix (78%), Miami (78%), Las Vegas (78%), and Denver (78%). Even in these cities, however, roughly three out of every four residents align with Christianity. ^
The highest percentage of souls who tended toward being atheist or agnostic were in Portland, Maine (19%), Seattle (19%), Portland, Oregon (16%), Sacramento (16%), and Spokane (16%)
Commitment to evangelism (agree strongly that a person has a responsibility to share their beliefs with others) saw the greatest percentage of endorsement by residents of Birmingham (64%) and Charlotte (54%), in contrast to residents of Providence (14%) and Boston (17%).
(See HERE for a table of casual Religious-Political relations. And HERE for correlation between faith, ideology, politics, environment, money.) TOC
But as seen in more than one FR thread, the way some absolve Catholics from blame is to argue that about half of Catholics did not vote [citation needed], and then blame evangelicals for Romney's loss, as too many of them did not vote, for among those who did 79% voted for Romney - a higher % than any other religious group, even Mormons! So about half the Catholics are pouring on a fire while almost 80% of evangelicals are fighting it, but the latter it to be blamed for the loss of the house because too many stayed home like about half the Catholics.
Case in point, this day-after-the-election diatribe from Catholic blogger Kevin Collins:
The experts are wringing their hands trying to figure out why Romney didn’t win, but now we know: the 14 million missing voters from Romney’s column are Evangelicals. Evangelical Christians may not be evil people, but they helped an evil president become an evil dictator on Tuesday. The exact numbers aren’t in but clearly the vast majority of Evangelicals stayed home on Election Day. They weren’t dealing with a storm or a personal family emergency. They stayed home because they made a conscious decision to allow our Marxist enemy to continue ruining our lives rather than have Mormon Mitt Romney as our president....The Evangelicals’ hatred of Romney burns so brightly it blinded them. Self- flagellation and a willingness to aid and abet a clear enemy became preferable to them – consequences be damned.
-- from the thread Evangelicals plunge America into darkness – mislead polls and stay home on Election Day
Some long for the good ol days, before her unholy use of the sword of men was lost.
Canons of the Ecumenical Fourth Lateran Council, 1215:
We excommunicate and anathematize every heresy that raises against the holy, orthodox and Catholic faith which we have above explained; condemning all heretics under whatever names they may be known, for while they have different faces they are nevertheless bound to each other by their tails, since in all of them vanity is a common element.
Those condemned, being handed over to the secular rulers of their bailiffs, let them be abandoned, to be punished with due justice, clerics being first degraded from their orders. As to the property of the condemned, if they are laymen, let it be confiscated; if clerics, let it be applied to the churches from which they received revenues. But those who are only suspected, due consideration being given to the nature of the suspicion and the character of the person, unless they prove their innocence by a proper defense, let them be anathematized and avoided by all 1-intil they have made suitable satisfaction; but if they have been under excommunication for one year, then let them be condemned as heretics.
Secular authorities, whatever office they may hold, shall be admonished and induced and if necessary compelled by ecclesiastical censure, that as they wish to be esteemed and numbered among the faithful, so for the defense of the faith they ought publicly to take an oath that they will strive in good faith and to the best of their ability to exterminate in the territories subject to their jurisdiction all heretics pointed out by the Church; so that whenever anyone shall have assumed authority, whether spiritual or temporal, let him be bound to confirm this decree by oath.
But if a temporal ruler, after having been requested and admonished by the Church, should neglect to cleanse his territory of this heretical foulness, let him be excommunicated by the metropolitan and the other bishops of the province. If he refuses to make satisfaction within a year, let the matter be made known to the supreme pontiff, that he may declare the ruler’s vassals absolved from their allegiance and may offer the territory to be ruled lay Catholics, who on the extermination of the heretics may possess it without hindrance and preserve it in the purity of faith; the right, however, of the chief ruler is to be respected as long as he offers no obstacle in this matter and permits freedom of action.
The same law is to be observed in regard to those who have no chief rulers (that is, are independent). Catholics who have girded themselves with the cross for the extermination of the heretics, shall enjoy the indulgences and privileges granted to those who go in defense of the Holy Land. (http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/lateran4.asp)
Pope Innocent IV, Ad extirpanda: The head of state or ruler must force all the heretics whom he has in custody,{8} provided he does so without killing them or breaking their arms or legs,as actual robbers and murderers of souls and thieves of the sacraments of God and Christian faith, to confess their errors and accuse other heretics whom they know, and specify their motives, {9} and those whom they have seduced, and those who have lodged them and defended them,as thieves and robbers of material goods are made to accuse their accomplices and confess the crimes they have committed.
Those convicted of heresy by the aforesaid Diocesan Bishop,surrogate or inquisitors, shall be taken in shackles to the head of state or ruler or his special representative, instantly,or at least within five days, and the latter shall apply the regulations promulgated against such persons...- http://userwww.sfsu.edu/%7Edraker/history/Ad_Extirpanda.html
[Error condemned] That heretics be burned is against the will of the Spirit. Exsurge Domine, Bull of Pope Leo X issued June 15, 1520 http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo10/l10exdom.htm
So instead of blaming the majority of Catholics - who make up a greater percentage of the electorate - for not voting like Evangelicals, they blame the most conservative group because too many of them did what Catholic’s did. The fact is that in many elections, it would have been better for conservatives if all Catholics stayed home, which cannot be said of Evangelicals. But they must protect Rome from any blame at any cost to objectivity.
I would like to know where he got his “the vast majority of Evangelicals”stayed home figure, and how man Catholics did. The National Election Pool, which conducts exit polls for major media outlets, decided to exclude 19 states from its polling this last election, rather than the usual 50, and i am not sure if that makes much of a difference.
FWIW, I do not believe there is a "Catholic Vote". We've seen in the last couple elections that no matter what the leaders of this church do, or say, a majority in the 52-55% range will vote for the liberals. I think in the last election the RCC leadership was pretty clear that they did not support obama and it really didn't alter his vote totals. A better way to look at the "Catholic vote" is by breaking it down into different ethnic or economic groups. Their church leadership has had little or no influence over how their members vote.
Evangelical Christians are a clear example of a religious group that is solidly conservative even though most Black Americans are identified with Evangelical churches and they vote in the 90%+ area for the liberals. I suspect that part of the more conservative view is because of the belief in Sola Scriptura rather than tradition and organizational authority.
And to drive that point home, here are two articles by Catholics which say the same thing - there is no "Catholic" vote:
They may call themselves Catholics, and they may even go to Mass, but when it comes to life choices they are virtually indistinguishable from everyone else in America. They don’t live radical Christianity out in any real sort of way. Their lives look just like the lives of their worldly neighbors. They don’t give any more than the average joe. They seem just as likely to divorce their spouses, have only 2.5 children as their non Catholic neighbors and they seem just as materialistic as everyone else. They attend church if they feel like it, but if there’s a weekend football game or the call of the beach house they’re just as likely to respond to that demand. When it comes to voting, they’ll vote as they wish according to wherever they get their opinions from–TV, the newspaper, the mass media–just like their neighbors. The one source they won’t consider when informing their vote is their priests and bishops.
-- from the thread Catholic Vote?Are Catholics now so “successfully” assimilated into American political life that they are without political impact—that there really is no such thing as a “Catholic vote”? Unfortunately enough, Catholics are largely indistinguishable from non-Catholics and, despite a few pundits, no, there really is no “Catholic vote.” This obvious conclusion—clear enough from the fact that the vote for the winning candidates in the last national election was approximately the same for Catholics and non-Catholics—has serious current implications....
....Compare two lists:
According to the USCCB, the five most Catholic states, in population, are: Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York and Connecticut. According to the American Life League, the states with the most pro-life legislation (i.e., inhibiting abortion in various ways) are: Oklahoma, Louisiana, Pennsylvania, Arkansas and Texas.This is a shocker. In short, there is no Catholic political impact in support of life in those states reportedly having the most Catholics. As Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philadelphia put it, after the 2008 election, “[w]e need to stop overcounting our numbers, our influence, our institutions, and our resources, because they are not real.”
-- from the thread The Mythical Catholic Vote: The Harmful Consequences of Political Assimilation
I read the threads, you guys don’t need to put me into your group pings for everything that you post.
Look at that ridiculous post.
Do you really think that someone is going to read all that?
You posted it to me and I have no idea what you wanted to say, and I’m not going to spend hours of reading and visiting links at your direction to unravel what you should have been able to say within a few sentences or a paragraph.
I sometimes wonder if that isn't something we conservatives in general need to look at as well....I don't think we have the numbers nor influence nor resources we appear to need to change the trajectory of this nation....there are more of ‘everything else’ than WE.
Evil appears to be on the upside...and running ravage in all out institutes, churches and governance.....But the He did say these days would come. I just didn't think it would come so fast and hammer so hard!
Their mind is made up. Don’t confuse them with the facts!
Sheesh!!!
.....”Evangelical Christians are a clear example of a religious group that is solidly conservative”.....
I don’t think so.... for many of them are also being caught up in the worldly ways of this nation. Perhaps not to the degree catholics have gone..but realistically the Evangelical community is shifting...and it’s a deceptive shift.....
Um, I didn’t include you in the group pings to the person to whom you were responding, I pinged the group in addition to you.
I would have courtesy pinged you to the response to the Catholic poster you were debating with anyway, whether or not I pinged anyone else.
Relax. You’re not on my ping list.
After 150 years of knowing the Catholic vote, and it's devotion to the democrat party, we know that there is a "Catholic vote", it isn't wild and unpredictable, it is predictable and routine, just as the Protestant vote is, in the other direction.
The Catholic voters all belong to a single denomination, and their vote is predictable, because it is "the catholic vote".
It’s not really ridiculous.
Catholics are forever demanding that dan cite his comments and assertions.
He is.
They want data instead of unsupported assertions, they get it.
And they STILL will not acknowledge that there’s anything to them.
Since they are the least worldly, and most conservative voters in America and deliver 80% of their vote for pro-life and conservatism. I think that we can count them as ""a clear example of a religious group that is solidly conservative"".
Actually, I guess America' second largest church denomination (Southern Baptist) could be slightly to the right of the catch all (mass) category of "Evangelical".
daniel1212’s post 82 was only to me.
I’m not going to wade through all that nonsense to find out what he wanted.
Well, either you actually portray a worse portrait of Catholics here...OR, you yourself are negatively contributing to your statement of "lies, damned lies and statistics."
Per this source, Voter Turnout, 54-62% of the Voting Eligible Population (which is distinct from VAP -- The Voting Age Population as not all adults are eligible to vote) turned out to vote over these past three Presidential elections. This % reflects BOTH registered AND unregistered voters.
You say that "less than half of the self described Catholics vote"...whereas in the presidential elections, 54% (2000), 60% (2004), 62% (2008), 58% (2012) of ALL eligible voters actually voted.
Since Catholics are approximately 1/4th of all registered voters (I saw one 2008 figure of 47 million...so it's probably higher than that now)...
...and if they turn out anywhere from 5-13% LESS than the national average [say your 49% or less you cite...vs. 54-62% of all]
...and this 5-13% INCLUDES those %-'bringer-down' Catholic votes ... meaning that % of DIFFERENCE/contrast with other voting groups actually grows to a 7-->16% difference between Catholic and non-Catholic voters (in terms of turn-out...if what you said is "so"...IOW, say 49% of Catholic VEP vs. 56-65% of non-Catholic VEP.
So, if you are right, Catholics are the sloppiest voters there are even counting upon them to turn out!
But I don't think you are right here. I think Catholics, by and large, turn out at almost the same rate other voters do...and I think you were simply trying to reduce as far as possible what the representational impact Catholic voters constitute...in order to dilute Catholic voter accountability (as much as you could possibly do)
Overall...the numbers speak for themselves:
In a population around 312 million...about 78 million of them (25%) are Catholic...which includes kids/minors, btw...
...and 47-48 million of them are old enough (& registered) to vote...
...and, at first glance, at least almost 30 million of them DID vote in the 2012 presidential election...among almost 125 million voters...
...and, taking a November 2012 CNN citation that 52% of Catholics voted for Obama...
...that means that since over HALF of Catholic voters voted for Obama, over 1 in 5 Obama votes (by my calculation, 22% of ALL Obama votes...about 14.5 million of Obama's 65.5 million votes) came from Catholics...
That's quite handy "pocket change" eh?
So immigrant Catholics from Catholic nations vote more conservatively and pro-life than Catholics who have been here for generations?
We know that it is the opposite, the more American that Catholics become, the less liberal they are.
The left isn't pushing for Catholic immigration because they fear that it will take generations to turn them from pro-life conservatives into pro-abortion voting liberals.
It’s only lies, damned lies, and statistics when it impugns the Catholic church.
If it either makes Catholicism look good or impugns anyone else non-Catholic, then it’s about written in stone.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.