Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Paul Ryan’s Bishop Defends Him Amid Attacks on His Application of Church Teaching
National Catholic Register ^ | 08/16/12 | JOAN FRAWLEY DESMOND

Posted on 08/16/2012 7:12:26 AM PDT by Brian Kopp DPM

National Catholic Register


Daily News

Paul Ryan’s Bishop Defends Him Amid Attacks on His Application of Church Teaching

Madison, Wis., Bishop Robert Morlino says he’s not endorsing Ryan, but upholds the candidate’s reputation as a serious Catholic committed to applying Church social doctrine.

BY JOAN FRAWLEY DESMOND

| Posted 8/15/12 at 7:05 PM

Diocese of Madison, Wis.
 

MADISON, Wis. — Earlier this year, when Georgetown University announced that Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., the chairman of the House Budget Committee, would defend his budget in a public address, almost 90 faculty members at the Jesuit institution publicly denounced his interpretation of Church doctrine.

While the media generally presented the harsh judgment as a sign that Ryan’s budget proposals violated core beliefs of his Church, most news stories failed to examine why the subsequent appearance of Kathleen Sebelius, the secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, at a Georgetown graduation event did not provoke a comparable furor. Sebelius is widely viewed as the architect of a federal contraception mandate denounced by the U.S. bishops as an “unprecedented” threat to the free exercise of Catholic institutions, but the same group of Georgetown faculty apparently saw no need to register their disapproval.

...

Now, Bishop Robert Morlino of Madison, Ryan’s bishop, has waded into this election-year minefield, clearly concerned that a valued member of his flock is being unfairly attacked by partisan forces.

In a column posted on his diocesan website Aug. 16, Bishop Morlino vouches for Ryan’s Catholic bona fides...

(Excerpt) Read more at ncregister.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS:
Subsidiarity, solidarity, and the lay mission

Print

E-mail

Bishop's Column
Thursday, Aug. 16, 2012 -- 12:00 AM
This column is the bishop’s communication with the faithful of the Diocese of Madison. Any wider circulation reaches beyond the intention of the bishop.

Dear friends,

It was no shock at all for me to learn that our diocesan native son, Paul Ryan, had been chosen to be a candidate for the Vice Presidency of the United States. I am proud of his accomplishments as a native son, and a brother in the faith, and my prayers go with him and especially with his family as they endure the unbelievable demands of a presidential campaign here in the United States. It is not for the bishop or priests to endorse particular candidates or political parties. Any efforts on the part of any bishop or priest to do so should be set aside. And you can be assured that no priest who promotes a partisan agenda is acting in union with me or with the Universal Church.

It is the role of bishops and priests to teach principles of our faith, such that those who seek elected offices, if they are Catholics, are to form their consciences according to these principles about particular policy issues.

However, the formation of conscience regarding particular policy issues is different depending on how fundamental to the ecology of human nature or the Catholic faith a particular issue is. Some of the most fundamental issues for the formation of a Catholic conscience are as follows: sacredness of human life from conception to natural death, marriage, religious freedom and freedom of conscience, and a right to private property.

Violations of the above involve intrinsic evil — that is, an evil which cannot be justified by any circumstances whatsoever. These evils are examples of direct pollution of the ecology of human nature and can be discerned as such by human reason alone. Thus, all people of good will who wish to follow human reason should deplore any and all violations in the above areas, without exception. The violations would be: abortion, euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide, same-sex marriage, government-coerced secularism, and socialism.

Where intrinsic evil is not involved

In these most fundamental matters, a well-formed Catholic conscience, or the well-formed conscience of a person of good will, simply follows the conclusions demanded by the ecology of human nature and the reasoning process. A Catholic conscience can never take exception to the prohibition of actions which are intrinsically evil. Nor may a conscience well-formed by reason or the Catholic faith ever choose to vote for someone who clearly, consistently, persistently promotes that which is intrinsically evil.

However, a conscience well-formed according to reason or the Catholic faith, must also make choices where intrinsic evil is not involved. How best to care for the poor is probably the finest current example of this, though another would be how best to create jobs at a time when so many are suffering from the ravages of unemployment. In matters such as these, where intrinsic evil is not involved, the rational principles of solidarity and subsidiarity come into play. The principle of solidarity, simply stated, means that every human being on the face of the earth is my brother and my sister, my “neighbor” in the biblical sense. At the same time, the time-tested best way for assisting our neighbors throughout the world should follow the principle of subsidiarity. That means the problem at hand should be addressed at the lowest level possible — that is, the level closest to the people in need. That again, is simply the law of human reason.

We can disagree on application

As one looks at issues such as the two mentioned above and seeks to apply the principles of solidarity and subsidiarity, Catholics and others of good will can arrive at different conclusions. These are conclusions about the best means to promote the preferential option for the poor, or the best means to reach a lower percentage of unemployment throughout our country. No one is contesting here anyone’s right to the basic needs of food, clothing, shelter, healthcare, etc. Nor is anyone contesting someone’s right to work and so provide for self and family. However there can be difference according to how best to follow the principles which the Church offers.

Making decisions as to the best political strategies, the best policy means, to achieve a goal, is the mission of lay people, not bishops or priests. As Pope Benedict himself has said, a just society and a just state is the achievement of politics, not the Church. And therefore Catholic laymen and women who are familiar with the principles dictated by human reason and the ecology of human nature, or non-Catholics who are also bound by these same principles, are in a position to arrive at differing conclusions as to what the best means are for the implementation of these principles — that is, “lay mission” for Catholics.

Thus, it is not up to me or any bishop or priest to approve of Congressman Ryan’s specific budget prescription to address the best means we spoke of. Where intrinsic evils are not involved, specific policy choices and political strategies are the province of Catholic lay mission. But, as I’ve said, Vice Presidential Candidate Ryan is aware of Catholic Social Teaching and is very careful to fashion and form his conclusions in accord with the principles mentioned above. Of that I have no doubt. (I mention this matter in obedience to Church Law regarding one’s right to a good reputation.)

Peace and reconciliation in coming months

I obviously didn’t choose the date for the announcement of Paul Ryan’s Vice Presidential Candidacy and as I express my pride in him and in what he has accomplished, I thought it best to move to discussion of the above matters sooner rather than later. No doubt it will be necessary to comment again on these principles in the days ahead for the sake of further clarification, and be assured that I will be eager to do so.

Above all, let us beg the Lord that divisions in our electorate will not be deepened so as to have a negative impact on pre-existing divisions within the Church during this electoral season. Let there be the peace and reconciliation that flow from charity on the part of all. Thank you for reading this. God Bless each one of you! Praised be Jesus Christ!


1 posted on 08/16/2012 7:12:33 AM PDT by Brian Kopp DPM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp

The Good Bishop cuts thru the Liberal “Catholic” spin. The problem is that they will not have the patience, understanding and honest critical thinking to listen to him.


2 posted on 08/16/2012 7:24:05 AM PDT by frogjerk (OBAMA NOV 2012 = HORSEMEAT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp

“Catholics and others of good will can arrive at different conclusions.”

Not if they vote for Obama, Bishop!


3 posted on 08/16/2012 7:25:02 AM PDT by DarthVader (Politicians govern out of self interest, Statesmen govern for a Vision greater than themselves)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp; don-o; stfassisi; stpio; savagesusie; A.A. Cunningham; A.Hun; Albion Wilde; ...
Wow! This is strong! Thanks be to God, Catholic doctrine from a Catholic bishop! This statement of Bishop Morlino really caught my eye:

"Some of the most fundamental issues for the formation of a Catholic conscience are as follows: sacredness of human life from conception to natural death, marriage, religious freedom and freedom of conscience, and a right to private property.

"Violations of the above involve intrinsic evil — that is, an evil which cannot be justified by any circumstances whatsoever. These evils are examples of direct pollution of the ecology of human nature and can be discerned as such by human reason alone.

"Thus, all people of good will who wish to follow human reason should deplore any and all violations in the above areas, without exception. The violations would be: abortion, euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide, same-sex marriage, government-coerced secularism, and socialism."

I really think we should give this the widest circulation.

4 posted on 08/16/2012 7:33:05 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("The first duty of intelligent men of our day is the restatement of the obvious." George Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp

Good to see!

But will the Bishop’s statements get the press the other statements had?


5 posted on 08/16/2012 7:33:57 AM PDT by redgolum ("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DarthVader

The bishop was making a broader, one that should be made often. The letter itself was a strong defense of Ryan and of all Catholics who happen not to be lefties. The tide is turning — in the American church and in the country.


6 posted on 08/16/2012 7:42:53 AM PDT by utahagen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: utahagen

I know I’m just clarifying it into more succint terms for those who do not like long winded answers. I also agree with you that the tide is turning.


7 posted on 08/16/2012 7:49:04 AM PDT by DarthVader (Politicians govern out of self interest, Statesmen govern for a Vision greater than themselves)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
Fr. Z is on it:

Bp. Morlino (D. Madison, WI) defends Rep. Paul Ryan’s (R-WI1) reputation

Please use the sharing buttons!  Thanks!

NOTA BENE: At the bottom of this longish post, I make a pitch which I hope you will read.

Rep. Paul Ryan’s (GOP VP candidate – R-WI1) congressional district overlaps with the Diocese of Madison, where His Excellency Most Reverend Robert C. Morlino is the local ordinary bishop.

On the site of the Diocese of Madison Bp. Morlino has published a comment about Rep. Ryan, who, in terms of the Church, is his subject.

Let’s have a look with some detail in order to get this whole thing clear:

Subsidiarity, solidarity, and the lay mission
Bishop’s Column
Thursday, Aug. 16, 2012

Dear friends,

It was no shock at all for me to learn that our diocesan native son, Paul Ryan, had been chosen to be a candidate for the Vice Presidency of the United States. I am proud of his accomplishments as a native son, and a brother in the faith, and my prayers go with him and especially with his family as they endure the unbelievable demands of a presidential campaign here in the United States. It is not for the bishop or priests to endorse particular candidates or political parties. Any efforts on the part of any bishop or priest to do so should be set aside. And you can be assured that no priest who promotes a partisan agenda is acting in union with me or with the Universal Church. [A new definition of "nano second" could be the interval between when a liberal reads this and then accuses Morlino of meddling in politics.]

It is the role of bishops and priests to teach principles of our faith, such that those who seek elected offices, if they are Catholics, are to form their consciences according to these principles about particular policy issues.

However, the formation of conscience regarding particular policy issues is different depending on how fundamental to the ecology of human nature[interesting starting point: ecology... ecological anthropology? anthropological ecology? ecological theo-anthropology?] or the Catholic faith a particular issue is. Some of the most fundamental issues for the formation of a Catholic conscience are as follows: sacredness of human life from conception to natural death, marriage, religious freedom and freedom of conscience, and a right to private property. [Which all happen to be burning issues in public debate and in the political campaign.]

Violations of the above involve intrinsic evil — that is, an evil which cannot be justified by any circumstances whatsoever. [It seems to me that some might bring in "eminent domain" when dealing with the right to property, but the principle remains: we have a right to property. ] These evils are examples of direct pollution of the ecology of human nature and can be discerned as such by human reason alone. [Good.] Thus, all people of good will who wish to follow human reason should deplore any and all violations in the above areas, without exception. The violations would be: abortion, euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide, same-sex marriage, government-coerced secularism, and socialism. [Since the starting point of the argument is human reason, we cannot be accused fairly of pushing "religious views" on the public when we defend life from a natural law stance.]

Where intrinsic evil is not involved

In these most fundamental matters, a well-formed Catholic conscience, or the well-formed conscience of a person of good will, simply follows the conclusions demanded by the ecology of human nature and the reasoning process. A Catholic conscience can never take exception to the prohibition of actions which are intrinsically evil. [You cannot be... cannot be... pro-choice and a faithful Catholic.] Nor may a conscience well-formed by reason or the Catholic faith [WATCH THIS...] ever choose to vote for someone who clearly, consistently, persistently promotes that which is intrinsically evil. [Some who are truth-deficient will claim that that was a political statement.  It. Was. Not.]

However, a conscience well-formed according to reason or the Catholic faith, must also make choices where intrinsic evil is not involved. [Now we get into contingent moral judgments.] How best to care for the poor is probably the finest current example of this, though another would be how best to create jobs at a time when so many are suffering from the ravages of unemployment. [In matters such as these, people can advance differing proposals about "how best" to handle a, b, or c.] In matters such as these, where intrinsic evil is not involved, the rational principles of solidarity and subsidiarity come into play. The principle of solidarity, simply stated, means that every human being on the face of the earth is my brother and my sister, my “neighbor” in the biblical sense.[And thus is our special concern because of the fact that we are members of the human race and because, as Christians, we obey Christ's two-fold command.] At the same time, the time-tested best way for assisting our neighbors throughout the world should follow the principle of subsidiarity. That means the problem at hand should be addressed at the lowest level possible — that is, the level closest to the people in need. That again, is simply the law of human reason.

We can disagree on application

As one looks at issues such as the two mentioned above [by which he seems to mean "care for the poor" and "creating jobs"] and seeks to apply the principles of solidarity and subsidiarity, Catholics and others of good will can arrive at different conclusions. These are conclusions about the best means to promote the preferential option for the poor, or the best means to reach a lower percentage of unemployment throughout our country. No one is contesting here anyone’s right to the basic needs of food, clothing, shelter, healthcare, etc. Nor is anyone contesting someone’s right to work and so provide for self and family. However there can be difference according to how best to follow the principles which the Church offers.

[On the other hand...] Making decisions as to the best political strategies, the best policy means, to achieve a goal, is the mission of lay people, not bishops or priests. As Pope Benedict himself has said, a just society and a just state is the achievement of politics, not the Church. And therefore Catholic laymen and women who are familiar with the principles dictated by human reason and the ecology of human nature, or non-Catholics who are also bound by these same principles, are in a position to arrive at differing conclusions as to what the best means are for the implementation of these principles — that is, “lay mission” for Catholics.

[NB:] Thus, it is not up to me or any bishop or priest to approve of Congressman Ryan’s specific budget prescription to address the best means we spoke of. Where intrinsic evils are not involved, specific policy choices and political strategies are the province of Catholic lay mission. But, [NB... and contrary to the claims of many liberals who are attacking Ryan's person and Ryan's proposals...] as I’ve said, Vice Presidential Candidate Ryan is aware of Catholic Social Teaching and is very careful to fashion and form his conclusions in accord with the principles mentioned above. Of that I have no doubt. (I mention this matter in obedience to Church Law regarding one’s right to a good reputation.)[Get that?  Ryan is being accused by some of advancing proposals that are "contrary", as they claim, to Catholic teaching.  Bp. Morlino is sticking up for Ryan, his subject and a public figure, NOT because Morlino is taking a political stand in favor of a candidate for a political party, but because Ryan has a right to a good reputation.  Ryan's proposals concern contingent moral judgments about the best ways to solve urgent problems.  People might have a different proposal based on Catholic teaching, but we must be honest about whether or not the proposals advanced are within the bounds of Catholic teaching.  Morlino is saying, it seems to me, that even while some might have other solutions, Ryan's are at least within those bounds. Therefore, to accuse him of advancing things contrary to Catholic teaching harms Ryan's reputation.  So, WHY is Bp. Morlino publishing this? Because Ryan is a public figure, and because the accusations have been made in public, as the man's bishop, Morlino senses a duty publicly to defend Ryan's reputation as a Catholic layman.  That's my reading of this.]

Peace and reconciliation in coming months

I obviously didn’t choose the date for the announcement of Paul Ryan’s Vice Presidential Candidacy and as I express my pride in him and in what he has accomplished, I thought it best to move to discussion of the above matters sooner rather than later. No doubt it will be necessary to comment again on these principles in the days ahead for the sake of further clarification, and be assured that I will be eager to do so.

Above all, let us beg the Lord that divisions in our electorate will not be deepened so as to have a negative impact on pre-existing divisions within the Church during this electoral season. Let there be the peace and reconciliation that flow from charity on the part of all. Thank you for reading this. God Bless each one of you! Praised be Jesus Christ!

There it is.  I said enough with the red comments to be able to move to another point.

If you support what Bp. Morlino wrote here (or even if you don’t) you might offer him a sign of appreciation first by a promise of prayers.  The Devil hates guys like him.  Offer some fasting and prayers for him.

Second, you might consider – right after sending me a donation – making a donation to a cause that is dear to his heart right now.

I visited Madison recently while the bishop’s annual get together with the diocesan seminarians was going on.  Bp. Morlino told me that their foundation to support the formation of seminarians was set up for handling about a half-dozen men at a time.  The diocese right now as 32 men in formation.

Consider sending a donation for the seminarians.

Click HERE.

Once you click there, there is a box with a drop-down menu.

You will know what to do.

When priests and bishops are getting it right, let them know.  Here is a concrete way you can do that.

Email this post.

8 posted on 08/16/2012 8:12:17 AM PDT by Brian Kopp DPM (Sin Makes You Stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: DarthVader
Thx for post. Better days are ahead!
9 posted on 08/16/2012 8:24:52 AM PDT by utahagen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp
No one is contesting here anyone’s right to the basic needs of food, clothing, shelter, healthcare, etc.

I'll do it for them, then. This was not the Founders' idea for a free nation -- that the nation owes you everything you need, free. The idea was that you are free to make a living (or live in a family that cares for its dependents) to pay for your own needs out of your work, with minimum government interference.

Forcing taxpayers to share everything with everybody leads inevitably to underwriting non-Catholic and unChristian "needs" such as abortion, birth control, Viagra for Medicare and imprisoned populations, illegals, etc etc.

God made us all individuals for a reason. Trying to extort charity through government compulsion is the politics of Covetousness, which violates one of the Big Ten Commandments. God wants charity to come from the hearts of individuals, not from automatic withdrawals by the IRS from "spiritual" credit cards.

10 posted on 08/16/2012 8:26:49 AM PDT by Albion Wilde (Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it. -- George Bernard Shaw)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o; Dr. Brian Kopp
So many Catholics do not understand subsidiarity. Let the smallest form of government take care of a problem if need be.

SUBSIDIARITY

The principle by which those in authority recongize the rights of the members in a society; and those in higher authority respect the rights of those in lower authority.

All items in this dictionary are from Fr. John Hardon's Modern Catholic Dictionary, © Eternal Life. Used with permission.

11 posted on 08/16/2012 8:37:44 AM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: redgolum

One test of a Catholic politicians loyalty is how HIS/HER bishop evaluates her reputation. Ryan’s bishops vouches for his fidenity. Sebelius’ bishops has told her she should not receive communion. Tells us a ton about the Georgetown faculty. A nest of vipers?


12 posted on 08/16/2012 8:38:56 AM PDT by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

Solidarity and subsidarity. The best way help our neighbor is for us to do it directly, not leave it to the community, much less to government. What is the old saying? Charity begins at home? For instance, teach you kid at home, don’t leave your child in the hands of strangers. They will attempt to steal away his loyalty and your common faith.


13 posted on 08/16/2012 8:43:01 AM PDT by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway; NYer; ELS; Pyro7480; livius; ArrogantBustard; Catholicguy; RobbyS; marshmallow; ...

Catholic Ping for Paul Ryan!


14 posted on 08/16/2012 8:43:15 AM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp
Paul Ryan’s Bishop Defends Him Amid Attacks on His Application of Church Teaching
Paul Ryan, Catholic Who Looks to Church's Social Teaching, Tapped as Romney Running Mate
The other Ryan: the candidate’s wife, Janna
Paul Ryan, Joe Biden, and Liberal False Equivalence
Ryan as VP Pick Continues Election Year Focus on Catholicism
Paul Ryan Faces Left-Wing Religious Attack
Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Holiness (Paul Ryan)
Paul Ryan: Midwesterner, Catholic, intellectual
15 posted on 08/16/2012 8:45:19 AM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp

Outstanding article. Shared on Facebook.


16 posted on 08/16/2012 8:50:05 AM PDT by Antoninus (Sorry, gone rogue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp; STARWISE; trisham

Thanks very much for this posting.


17 posted on 08/16/2012 8:53:44 AM PDT by onyx (FREE REPUBLIC IS HERE TO STAY! DONATE MONTHLY! IF YOU WANT ON SARAH PALIN''S PING LIST, LET ME KNOW)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Albion Wilde
No one is contesting here anyone’s right to the basic needs of food, clothing, shelter, healthcare, etc.

"I'll do it for them, then. This was not the Founders' idea for a free nation -- that the nation owes you everything you need, free."

Agreed. If there is a "right" to goods and services enforced by government redistribution then there is no more moral responsibility for individuals to care for their neighbors.

Not to mention the logical problem of determining the hierarchy of rights to scarce resources.

18 posted on 08/16/2012 9:00:12 AM PDT by Homer_J_Simpson ("Every nation has the government that it deserves." - Joseph de Maistre (1753-1821))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: DarthVader

How about rereading his letter without preconceived notions?

He said they can come to different conclusions about such matters as how to create jobs and/or provide for the needy.

More important, he said there can be no differing conclusions among Catholics, and those non-Catholics of good will, when the candidate promotes that which is intrinsically evil, i.e., in the RCC, abortion.


19 posted on 08/16/2012 9:01:12 AM PDT by EDINVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

Bp Morlino is one of the good guys! (as is Paul Ryan)


20 posted on 08/16/2012 9:03:30 AM PDT by afraidfortherepublic (ABO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp
The diocese right now as 32 men in formation.

Wow! Bp Morlino is doing as well, if not better, than Dardinal Dolan did in Milwaukee when he was Apb. He (singlehandedly with the Grace of God) turned a Seminary that was almost closed under FORMER Bp Weakland into a priest machine turning out half a dozen to a dozen new priests per year.

21 posted on 08/16/2012 9:08:16 AM PDT by afraidfortherepublic (ABO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp

“almost 90 faculty members at the Jesuit institution publicly denounced his interpretation of Church doctrine.”

I’m sorry, but Jesuits are not the greatest authority on Church doctrine. I say this as someone who has been on over 30 Jesuit retreats. The Spiritual Exercises are wonderful, but the theology is sometimes not completely in accord with Church teaching.


22 posted on 08/16/2012 9:26:38 AM PDT by rwa265 ("This is My Beloved Son, Listen to Him.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp
"Some of the most fundamental issues for the formation of a Catholic conscience are as follows: sacredness of human life from conception to natural death, marriage, religious freedom and freedom of conscience, and a right to private property." - (Underlining added)

Thanks for posting, and prayers for the Bishop!

Around the last point, much of today's debate about how to "help" the poor is centered. From the beginning, the oppressed who came to America understood that their path out of poverty lay in their freedom to pursue happiness (dreams, aspirations, and work), unhampered by a set of imperfect people in government trying to order their lives.

The American "People's" Declaration of Independence and Constitution provided a framework for individual freedom, opportunity, and personal achievement, under a system of laws to protect themselves from coercive power and theft of their earnings by elected representatives in government. Under that idea, actions which would be illegal and punishable for individuals to do to each other, would be prohibited for their government to do to them.

Now, by using commonly friendly words like "shared prosperity" to describe a government policy of force and coercion, the Obama Administration is pursuing another ideology in order to get votes, a tactic which is despicable on its face. Then, again, isn't that descriptive of how all totalitarian regimes initially present themselves in order to gain power?

In the course of his research for "Solzhenitsyn: A Soul in Exile" (Harper Collins), Joseph Pearch traveled to Moscow to interview the writer. The excerpt below is from that interview:

Solzhenitsyn: "In different places over the years I have had to prove that socialism, which to many western thinkers is a sort of kingdom of justice, was in fact full of coercion, of bureaucratic greed and corruption and avarice, and consistent within itself that socialism cannot be implemented without the aid of coercion. Communist propaganda would sometimes include statements such as "we include almost all the commandments of the Gospel in our ideology". The difference is that the Gospel asks all this to be achieved through love, through self-limitation, but socialism only uses coercion." Solzhenitsyn

Even the current President, at the National Prayer Breakfast this year, attempted to tie his policy of forced "sharing" to Jesus's appeal for voluntary charity.

Coercive "taking" power, when wielded against the citizenry by either the government alone (taxing), or in combination with another power (unions), is destructive of freedom and prosperity.

While Europe struggled with oppressive government intervention, the genius Founders of America recognized enduring truths about human nature, the human tendency to abuse power, and the possibilities of liberty for individuals. Richard Frothingham's 1872 "History of the Rise of the Republic of the United States," Page 14, contained the following footnote item on the condition of citizens of France:

"Footnote 1. M. de Champagny (Dublin Review, April, 1868) says of France, 'We were and are unable to go from Paris to Neuilly; or dine more than twenty together; or have in our portmanteau three copies of the same tract; or lend a book to a friend: or put a patch of mortar on our own house, if it stands in the street; or kill a partridge; or plant a tree near the road-side; or take coal out of our own land: or teach three or four children to read, . .. without permission from the civil government.'"

Clearly the government of France at that 1868 date laid an oppressive regulatory and tax burden on citizens, robbing them of their Creator-endowed liberty and enjoyment thereof. Frothingham observed that such coercive power constituted "a noble form robbed of its lifegiving spirit."

Thomas Jefferson warned Americans:

"To preserve [the] independence [of the people,] we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude. If we run into such debts as that we must be taxed in our meat and in our drink, in our necessaries and our comforts, in our labors and our amusements, for our callings and our creeds, as the people of England are, our people, like them, must come to labor sixteen hours in the twenty-four, give the earnings of fifteen of these to the government for their debts and daily expenses, and the sixteenth being insufficient to afford us bread, we must live, as they now do, on oatmeal and potatoes, have no time to think, no means of calling the mismanagers to account, but be glad to obtain subsistence by hiring ourselves to rivet their chains on the necks of our fellow-sufferers." --Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Kercheval, 1816. ME 15:39

Frothingham's theme, throughout his tracing of the ideas which gave "rise" to the American Republic was that it is what he called "the Christian idea of man." His 1872 history is recommended reading for all who wish to pursue a written history which preceded the so-called "progressives'" revisionist versions of the American founding.

23 posted on 08/16/2012 9:30:05 AM PDT by loveliberty2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk

Isn’t it amazing that lefties, who are SO big on claiming separation of church and state, are SO interested in Ryan’s beliefs and church teaching.

Alinsky said, “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.”

Of course, the implication is that they don’t have to live up to any standard.

Pelosi: makes up her own beliefs and claims to be a Catholic.

But people like her demand Ryan follow church teaching, IF AND ONLY IF they agree with it. (They certainly DON’T want Ryan to follow church teaching on abortion.) In addition, they lie about some of the teachings and want Ryan to follow the lies!


24 posted on 08/16/2012 9:49:01 AM PDT by Right Wing Assault (Dick Obama is more inexperienced now than he was before he was elected.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Someone should rent a billboard near Georgetown University with this quote on it.


25 posted on 08/16/2012 9:51:10 AM PDT by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic; Salvation

Isn’t promoting polytheism against the first and second commandments, and therefore intrinsically evil? If so, how can any good Catholic support a Mormon for President, who as a missionary promoted a false Christ and a false Gospel, and as a temple Mormon, unrepentantly regards himself as an embryonic god?

“Nor may a conscience well-formed by reason or the Catholic faith ever choose to vote for someone who clearly, consistently, persistently promotes that which is intrinsically evil.”


26 posted on 08/16/2012 10:35:05 AM PDT by Springfield Reformer (Winston Churchill: No Peace Till Victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp
Money quote:

"Thus, it is not up to me or any bishop or priest to approve of Congressman Ryan’s specific budget prescription to address the best means we spoke of. Where intrinsic evils are not involved, specific policy choices and political strategies are the province of Catholic lay mission. But, as I’ve said,

Vice Presidential Candidate Ryan is aware of Catholic Social Teaching and is very careful to fashion and form his conclusions in accord with the principles mentioned above. Of that I have no doubt. (I mention this matter in obedience to Church Law regarding one’s right to a good reputation.)"


27 posted on 08/16/2012 10:51:12 AM PDT by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Assault

Does the “Catholic” demographic prefer the Biden or the Ryan version of Catholicism?

Recently attended Mass at a different parish than the one I belong to and heard this: “Let us pray for the souls of the greedy who do not want to share” (in reference to Obamacare, a socialist’s dream).

We’re supposed to vote on principle, which trumps party or ideology, but unfortunately not only are many Catholics (including some priests and bishops, apparently) unfamiliar with or indifferent to the principle of subsidiarity, but they are also unaware of the intrinsic evil of socialism (an ideology clearly in direct contradiction to the principal of subsidiarity).

As a result, the Democrat party has successfully advanced socialism within the Catholic demographic by becoming synonymous in the minds of many with temporal charity (“championship of the poor”), and has successfully employed a divide and conquer strategy within the Church by demonizing conservative Catholics (as well as conservative Christians of all traditions and denominations) as oppressors of the poor.

And then there are other Catholics who refuse to vote for either viable candidate when one is clearly a far greater threat than the other in regard to sanctity of life, marriage, and freedom of conscience, etc. They are ignoring another principle, that of damage limitation.

The Alinskyite tactics appear to be working, at least to some degree. We’ll find out how well soon enough.


28 posted on 08/16/2012 11:02:52 AM PDT by BlatherNaut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: redgolum
But will the Bishop’s statements get the press the other statements had?

So far there is no coverage of this major statement in the MSM. Can someone send this to Drudge?

29 posted on 08/16/2012 11:16:08 AM PDT by Brian Kopp DPM (Sin Makes You Stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Albion Wilde
You are misreading Morlino's meaning here. Perhaps understandably. You are interpreting basic "rights" as "basic rights payable by the State through coercion, i.e. taxation." This is how most Americans would read it; but it's now how Catholics are supposed to read it.

You have to read the actor here, not as the "State," but as "Society" --- meaning, elements of the human community, especially those societies directly founded by God: namely, the Family and the Church.

The trouble is when these "rights" are interpreted in a statist wasy. The right of a hungry, homeless, sick person to food, housing, medical care --- is first obligatory on himself, then on his family, then on his parish, etc. etc. In emergencies, the first person who comes along (e.g. the Samaritan finding a man by the side of the road.) In times of disaster, the city; possibly the county, etc.

Carry on.

30 posted on 08/16/2012 12:08:45 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("The first duty of intelligent men of our day is the restatement of the obvious." George Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom; thefrankbaum; Tax-chick; GregB; saradippity; Berlin_Freeper; Litany; SumProVita; ...

Ping!


31 posted on 08/16/2012 1:27:04 PM PDT by NYer (Without justice, what else is the State but a great band of robbers? - St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Springfield Reformer
"Schism and heresy are evil too, so I guess I can't vote for Protestants."

I put "-" quotes around that so I can say I didn't say that, I was quoting somebody else.

Nothing in my faith forbids me to vote for someone of a different faith.

Look, at election time I'm not voting for husband, a catechist, or a canonized saint. I'm voting for a public servant. What I'm looking at, when I choose between two candidates, is two sets of policies. I will vote for the better of the two whether the candidate is a Catholic, a Protestant, an Orthodox, a Baptist, a Mormon, a Jew, a Sikh, or even none of the above.

His policies concern me.

His religion doesn't concern me.

Unless he wants to change my religion.

Then we've got problems.

32 posted on 08/16/2012 2:51:50 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("The first duty of intelligent men of our day is the restatement of the obvious." George Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Sorry, but I’m actually with your bishop on this one. And me a Baptist. This is surprising.

But then schism is a definitional thing, perhaps evil from your perspective (or perhaps Rome is the original schismatic?), but certainly not a universal, intrinsic evil, like willful murder or brazen idolatry in defiance of God’s most basic laws. And we are your “separated brethren,” after all. I am stunned we would be unable to agree that someone who has aspirations to be a god has stepped into intrinsic evil that should foreclose our support of him. Who knew?

So then do you think your bishop is wrong? If Pelosi was a conservative in every other respect, but still pushed abortion, and she were running as the R against Obama, would you vote for her? Intrinsic evil and all? I mean, she’s not going to be canonized anytime soon, but that shouldn’t matter. You said so. Right?

Peace,

SR


33 posted on 08/16/2012 3:20:03 PM PDT by Springfield Reformer (Winston Churchill: No Peace Till Victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Springfield Reformer
"Sorry, but I’m actually with your bishop on this one. And me a Baptist. This is surprising."

I maybe haven't had sufficient chocolate to fire up my neurons today, but either I'm not following you, or you are misconstruing Bishop Morlino's remarks.

Morlino didn't say one word about Romney's Mormonism.

He did speak about not voting for intrinsic evils, but nobody has asked me to vote for Mormon polytheism or for any other religion as a matter of public policy. Naturally, if Romney were proposing Mormonism as the Established Religion of the United States, I'd vote against him --- just as I'd vote against you, SR, if you were proposing that the Baptist Church should be the Established Religion. But since nobody is in fact proposing this, that point is not relevant.

In a society in which there is not religious unanimity, I always recommend Natural Law as a way of talking about public issues. It doesn't rely directly on supernatural revelation, and so one doesn't have to waste time arguing about the Koran, the Book of Mormon, or even the proper interpretation of the Epistle to the Romans.

Rather, using Natural Law, one can use arguments based on evidence and reasonable inferences from evidence, in order to find the policies which best contribute to human flourishing. This works. The Declaration of Independence and the Federalist Papers are full of Natural Law.

Bishop Morlino did not address the Mormon faith or the Baptist faith or the Hindu faith. Nor would he --- when talking about politics --- unless they had an impact on public policy.

So I don't think you can claim him as your ally in your argument against non-Christians running for political office..

34 posted on 08/16/2012 4:30:26 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("The first duty of intelligent men of our day is the restatement of the obvious." George Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Ah, so this means, in our hypothetical, that if the newly minted conservative Republican, Nancy Pelosi, whose only fault is that she promotes abortion, suddenly decided to be prolife as a matter of public policy, but freely aborted her own children and promoted abortion in her own family, that you would be OK with that expression of intrinsic evil. She would then be better than Obama and you could vote for her. As long as her practice of intrinsic evil is only personal. Right?


35 posted on 08/16/2012 4:48:27 PM PDT by Springfield Reformer (Winston Churchill: No Peace Till Victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Springfield Reformer
Ah. No.

I wouldn't vote for Pelosi.

On this planet or any other.

36 posted on 08/16/2012 5:16:11 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("The first duty of intelligent men of our day is the restatement of the obvious." George Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

It is excellent as most Catholic Theology has proven to be. It is the Marxist “Twist” they put on words like “social justice” that many followers get flummoxed and confused.

The Pope has clearly written that Marxist ideology is intrinsically EVIL and he doesn’t equivocate on it at all. Some of the so-called “nuns” and “priests” have infiltrated to take down Catholic Church from within===they need to be exposed by the parish people. Bishop Morlino is a great Bishop.


37 posted on 08/16/2012 8:01:08 PM PDT by savagesusie (Right Reason According to Nature = Just Law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
You are misreading Morlino's meaning here.... You are interpreting basic "rights" as "basic rights payable by the State through coercion, i.e. taxation." This is how most Americans would read it; but it's now how Catholics are supposed to read it.

Thanks for your input here, respected FRiend. I'm still uninformed on many issues from the R.C. point of view. Love the exchange here on FR; so different from the vein-bulging and tears around the dinner table in my "mixed" family of origin.

38 posted on 08/16/2012 9:01:54 PM PDT by Albion Wilde (Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it. -- George Bernard Shaw)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Springfield Reformer

Paul Ryan is not supporting Mitt Romney as PRIEST. He’s supporting him as President of the US. Since when does our President have to be the same religion as we are? I haven’t seen a Catholic in the White House since JFK, and we all know how that worked out. Take your specious arguments and bury them where the sun doesn’t shine.


39 posted on 08/16/2012 9:03:20 PM PDT by afraidfortherepublic (ABO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: rwa265
I’m sorry, but Jesuits are not the greatest authority on Church doctrine.

ROFLOL! When my sons were attending Jesuit High School in Houston, some of the other mothers and I asked permission for the boys to sell their raffle tickets for the school's annual fund raiser after Mass at our parish. The priests at our parish operated a rival high school, although it was a bit further away than Jesuit. One of our pastoral associates asked me and another mother with a wink, "Why don't you people send your sons to a CATHOLIC High School?"

40 posted on 08/16/2012 9:14:06 PM PDT by afraidfortherepublic (ABO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: cindy-true-supporter; maica

Ping!


41 posted on 08/16/2012 9:40:37 PM PDT by Albion Wilde (Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it. -- George Bernard Shaw)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic

Well, there’s a polite response. You remember that passage in Scripture about speaking the truth in love? Catholics believe in that, don’t they? I do. If you don’t like what I have to say, fine. But there is absolutely no reason to go scatological on me.

Besides, the argument is good. You didn’t address the substance of it, which, I surmise, is why you had to resort to vulgarity. I could no more support a blatant polytheist for President than I could a flagrant adulterer or an ongoing murderer. That’s not just a difference in denominational flavor. Aspiration to deity is intrinsic evil, positively Luciferian. I find it sad that so many Catholics here are not uncomfortable with it.

In any event, I am sorry if my convictions offend you. But I have not yet found anything in Scripture that permits me to voluntary empower anyone whose “church” is devoted to destroying Christian faith and opposing the Christian God. As John says, even to bid godspeed to such a person is to become a partaker in their evil, and, I surmise, the judgment that must surely follow. You do what you want. I want no part of that.

Peace,

SR


42 posted on 08/16/2012 11:28:48 PM PDT by Springfield Reformer (Winston Churchill: No Peace Till Victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Springfield Reformer
Well, many Christians here at FR have voted for, or politically favored, divorced/remarried persons (Reagan was one; there are others, but I don't keep track) whom Our Lord said are ongoing adulterers, since He does not recognize remarriage while the first spouse is still living.

Serial monogamy is not Biblical "one man - one woman marriage."

If you want to hold politicians to that standard, fine. I expect to see charts analyzing all the candidates' marital status. It should be interesting.

43 posted on 08/17/2012 4:49:20 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("You can observe a lot just by watchin'." - Yogi Berra)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Albion Wilde
Here's one daunting thing: that for my entire adult lifetime (and I'm 60) it has been up to the Catholic layperson to pro-actively seek out, DIG out, research, read, assimilate and apply Catholic doctrine on his own, since it has been so rarely preached from the pulpit.

Perhaps it has always been so, I don't know. I remember reading about timorous clergy in fin de seicle Paris who couldn't bring themselves to preach to their bourgeois congregations when the text was "Woe to you rich." Nowadays there's little on the Commandments, on the reality of Divine Judgment, practically nothing on our disputed Catholic sex-and-gender doctrines, and what you get on "social justice" has heretofore been likely the Democratic Party agenda dressed up in ecclesiastical bafflegab. This is not Catholic doctrine.

Raises the question, "Is a teaching a teaching, if nobody is teaching it?"

Good thing the Catholic Catechism is online, and searchable (Link) --- I go there regularly, just a keystroke away! --- as are the conciliar documents, the encyclicals, and of course there are great Catholic blogs and websites.

The other good news is that we seem to have turned a corner. Morlino's statement is a good example of it. For years we were sandbagged by the "Jean Jadot and Pio Laghi bishops" --- so named because they were appointed under the influence of Jadot and Laghi, the Apostolic Nuncios to the US decades back --- but now the B-16s are finally coming down the runway.

Pray for this restoration. I mean it. It's like a baby surrounded by wolves. Pray HARD for the Pope.

44 posted on 08/17/2012 6:11:06 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("He's XVI -- he's beautiful -- and he's mine.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
Here's one daunting thing: that for my entire adult lifetime (and I'm 60) it has been up to the Catholic layperson to pro-actively seek out, DIG out, research, read, assimilate and apply Catholic doctrine on his own, since it has been so rarely preached from the pulpit....

Much in every religion is actually cultural -- things tend to stay the way they were when and where the religion was founded, or when it was socially most powerful; hence the pipe organ tradition of worship music and the nun's habits from early Holy Roman Empire days. Among American Protestants, many neighborhood congregations retain the stripped-down frontier church of plain altar platforms and excruciating hard pews; and the traditionally teetotaling denominations always offer grape juice instead of wine as Communion. Many of our nation's Christmas decorations reflect the folk traditions, evergreens, mistletoe and holly of our European founding populations, having symbolic value attached to them rather than meaning arising from the scriptures.

Having grown up in a half-Protestant, half-Catholic extended family, I've had a view of both cultures all my life, if not both religions in full. So my question here is, don't Catholic churches have Sunday School for children and adults? Along with doughnuts and jello mold salads, Sundy School and/or Bible study classes are usually found in most Protestant denominations; although the Democrat Party line is also a big danger there since the 60s. There are some very good curricula, however, such as the excellent Christian Believer workbooks, which cover the broad history of teachings, from the Nicene Council on down.

btw, thank you for the link to the online catechism. I was in the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception bookstore a couple of times recently and could not find it.

Also, if anyone knows where to get a Bible translation in vernacular Italian, I'd like to find one.

45 posted on 08/17/2012 8:15:22 AM PDT by Albion Wilde (Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it. -- George Bernard Shaw)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Albion Wilde
The level of adult ed depends on the parish. Some places it's robust, challenging, solid; but many are (in my experience) threadbare. My own parish has a couple of little Bible-studies running; and all parishes, as far as I know, have an RCIA program (that's adult-ed for incoming inquirers, catchumens, and converts --- I'm the n00bie on the teaching team here.) I'm planning on working with the new DRE (director of relig ed) in the parish to beef things up a little.

A lot of parishes have launched Fr. Robert Barron's "Catholicism" series. It's really excellent, and a lot of it is on the Internet. I realy recommend plugging to Fr. Barron. I could roll out my Thesaurus-of-Superlatives to describe him, the adjectives centering around the synonyms for "broad" and "deep." Or in other words, "Catholic."

As far as I know, the best and most recent Italian language Bible is the CEI Edition (Conferenza Episcopale Italiana) published in 2008. You can find that at Amazon.com (Link) and probably elsewhere online...

May Our Lord bless you, FRiend.

46 posted on 08/17/2012 12:16:01 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("Pray (Pray!) We've got to pray (Pray!) You've got to pray just to make it today." - M.C. Hammer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

And bless you profoundly!

Your parish is lucky to have your involvement in religious education. Go, Mrs!


47 posted on 08/17/2012 3:02:30 PM PDT by Albion Wilde (Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it. -- George Bernard Shaw)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

I agree that a politician embroiled in unrepentant adultery is almost as problematic as an open idolater. Both are rejections of the most basic of God’s laws, and therefore intrinsically evil, and had I known then (1980, 1984) what I know now, I would have been forced to reconsider. Of course, the same applies to JFK, but I wasn’t voting that far back.

However, there are distinctions between Reagan’s case and Romney’s. Reagan did not seek the divorce. Jane Wyman did, allegedly becoming attached to her costar in Johnny Belinda, Lew Ayers, while married to Reagan. If so, the much debated “adultery exception” of Matthew 19:9 may apply:

Mat 19:9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

Now if you know your natural law, you have to admit that obligating a Presbyterian to the finer points of Catholic marriage rules cannot possibly qualify as “intrinsic evil,” because to so qualify, a deed must be evil according to what is accessible by nature and reason to all people everywhere, not just Catholics. Murder so qualifies. Deserting your spouse for another qualifies. Seeking to be God qualifies. But falling short on the technicalities of a specific body of claimed revelation does not qualify, not even according to Aquinas. Especially when the words of Jesus Himself seem to confirm an exception.

But even if Reagan had been a Catholic operating under Catholic law, he might have done OK. He did not initiate the divorce. Jane Wyman did. Furthermore, Wyman had been married before, and under Catholic annulment rules, Reagan may have an argument that the marriage was unlawful to begin with. Furthermore, the disqualification for public office outlined by the bishop’s rubric of “persistent intrinsic evil” would not logically apply to a sin repented of, even if the consequences could not be justly reversed, and it is possible Reagan repented. No one but God and Reagan know for sure.

Bottom line, if Reagan were running this year, I could probably talk myself into supporting him, despite his mistakes, because his life was not about his occasional unworthy mistakes, but his persistent and worthy aspirations.

But Romney is still a temple Mormon. His persistent aspiration to deity is his intrinsic evil; “god in embryo,” purveyor of a false gospel, preacher of a false Christ. He is unworthy of support from any who follow Christ in truth. Until he breaks from the LDS, I have no choice but to reject him.

Peace,

SR


48 posted on 08/17/2012 5:08:53 PM PDT by Springfield Reformer (Winston Churchill: No Peace Till Victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Springfield Reformer
Well, you've made a coherent argument there, and I thank you for the time and reflection you've put into it.

Myself, I would make a distinction between (I don't know quite what to call it) "depraved heart" crimes, i.e. crimes of malice or "moral turpitude," vs. errors which may stem from a good will being led down a mistaken path.

I think crimes against one's fellow human beings are more often in the first category, because anyone who reflects on "Do unto others what you would have them do unto you," knows that they wouldn't want to be murdered, betrayed by their spouse, cheated or defrauded, lied about, etc.

On the other hand, religious errors, although objectively based on falsehood, are more often in the second category, "Honest mistakes." No malice involved.

This is especially if the erring brother is following the religious training and instruction he received from his mother and father. He associates these doctrines with the goodness of the people he trusted most, he receives the esteem of honest people, he is intending to follow the path of godliness, and his conscience doesn't reprove him: not because he has a wicked, seared conscience, but because it has been misled from his earliest instruction.

It's always legitimate to try to spot where a person's religious convictions might lead them to bad policy decisions. I don't want Muslims guiding our foreign and military policy, or Amish running the U.S. Marine Corps, or Christian Scientists making policy for the Centers for Disease Control. Or... Baptists... judging the Napa Valley Wine Festival?

But where a person's error is purely theological (rather than moral or policy-oriented), that's where the public scrutiny gives way to private liberty. It's with good reason that the Constitution repudiates any religious test for public office.

I would certainly rather have a pro-life pro-Consttution atheist (e.g. Nat Hentoff) for political office, than some jack-leg, pro-abort, anti-Constitutional "Catholic." Good evening to you, Reformer.

49 posted on 08/17/2012 6:06:54 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("The Holy Catholic Church: the more Catholic it is, the more Holy it is.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson