AmericanPapist Comments
How do you respond to someone who gives you this?:
"my political views find their origins in the New Testament. Jesus' message of social justice and concern for the societally underpriviledged is undeniable, and if one were to try to pinpoint a "primary" teaching, I think one would point to the Greatest Commandment to love your neighbor as yourself. Of course, this certainly implies that abortion runs against that teaching, as too would war, poverty, genocide, etc. However, I'm not aware of any teaching that puts the unborn singularly ahead of all other concerns."
"I'm not aware of any teaching that puts the unborn singularly ahead of all other concerns."
There is no such principle in the abstract. In absolute moral terms, the evil of abortion is not of a different order of magnitude than other intrinsic evils such as euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research and therapeutic cloning (although an argument could be made that it is somewhat worse than any of those).
In the current cultural situation, abortion necessarily has a special prominence because (a) abortion is the only intrinsic evil that is championed both as a basic human right and as a constitutionally guaranteed freedom, and (b) the sheer scale of murder that takes place by this means.
"my political views find their origins in the New Testament."
The New Testament is correctly understood and applied only in conjunction with sacred tradition and in light of authentic magisterial interpretation.
I've assembled some evidence on the necessity of giving primacy to the life issues. Hope that helps.
Kmiec, Morning's Minion, Katherine, are y'all listening?
I should start a new counter seeing how long it takes folks to even admit some bishops are claiming these things. Wait for the response to be "oh well Catholic social teaching is just a suggestion anyway." Right.
More bishops with spines! More shepherds making sure that, if members of their flocks should happen to wake up in hell one morning, the sheep won't have to wonder how they got there.
I wish they would also make a statement about war and abortion. Many misguided Catholics (and non Catholics) believe that the deaths caused by war and by abortion are equal, therefore they are justified in voting for a candidate who opposes war but supports abortion.
War is hell. But it is NOT the intrinsic evil that abortion is. Murdering an innocent unborn baby is far more egregious than fighting a (just) war, particularly in this day and age when we use technology to minimize civilian casualties.
, I think one would point to the Greatest Commandment to love your neighbor as yourself.
I think the greatest commandment is to love God, the second is like it, love your neighbor.
Yesterday I wrote an excerpt from Pius X encyclical letter condemning the errors of the Sillon movement in France. I think the modern peace and justice/community activist movement is the offspring of that same movement that was previously condemned.
Here is a piece from my post, taken from Pope Pius X encyclical letter to the French bishops:
"We wish to draw attention to the distortion of the Gospel and to the sacred character of Our Lord Jesus Christ, God and Man, prevailing within the Sillon and elsewhere."
As soon as the social question is being approached, it is a fashion in some quarters to first put aside the divinity of Jesus Christ, and then to mention only His unlimited clemency, His companion of all human miseries, and His pressing exhortations to the love of our neighbour and to the brotherhood of men.
True, Jesus has loved us with an immense, infinite love, and He came on earth to suffer and die so that, gathered around Him in justice and love, motivated by the same sentiments of mutual charity, all men might live in peace and happiness. But for the realisation of this temporal and eternal happiness, He has laid down with supreme authority the condition that we must belong to His Flock, that we must accept his doctrine, that we must practice virtue, and that we must accept the teaching and guidance of Peter and his successors.
Further while Jesus was kind to sinners and to those who went astray, He did not respect their false ideas, however sincere they might have appeared. He loved them all, but he instructed them in order to convert them and save them."
"The same (error) applies to the notion of Fraternity which they found on the love of common interest or, beyond all philosophies and religions, on the mere notion of humanity, thus embracing with an equal love and tolerance all human beings and their miseries, whether these are intellectual, moral or physical and temporal. But Catholic doctrine tells us that the primary duty of charity does not lie in the toleration of false ideas, however sincere they may be, nor in theoretical or practical indifference towards the errors and vices in which we see our brethern plunged, but in zeal for their intellectual and moral improvement as well as for their material well-being. Catholic doctrine further tells us that love for our neighbour flows from our love for God, Who is Father to all, and goal of the human family; and in Jesus Christ whose members we are, to the point that in doing good to others, we are doing good to Jesus Christ Himself. Any other kind of love is sheer illusion, sterile and fleeting."
Anonymous, you can read the rest on my blog if you wish but I think that is a good start to answer the question you asked.
After attending a Catholic Alliance for the Common Good meeting held at a convent, I again perused through the Faithful Citizenship handout. I find it frustrating that the evil of abortion is listed in 8th place in the first paragraph. How can we claim primacy when the bishops who author this statement put it as a “Oh, and by the way”? On the back page was listed as number 1, abortion, euthanasia, human cloning and destruction of human embryos for research, and genocide, torture, unjust war and the use of the death penalty as well as to pursue peace and help overcome poverty, racism, and other conditions that demean human life.
Would someone’s nose fall off if they gave the evil of destruction of children its own clout?
Each and every night while standing vigil at the local mill, I pray for clarity, that hearts will be changed and eyes opened to see the truth as Jesus sees it. There is no pursuit of liberty or happiness without LIFE.
Where in the document on Faithful Citizenship is the statement that the preeminent focus in this election is the peril of the unborn? I have read and reread, all I come up with is ambiguity. If I used this document to instruct my vote, I’m not sure I would have a concrete idea about who is the better of two evils.
Thank God for Bishops who come out of the herd to teach us without using “Bishop-speak” and leave no doubt about which path to follow.
Kathrine seems to be selectively incapable of seeing certain posts on here. :-)
Vox Nova's take -- the bishops are wrong or they are ambiguous.
Excellent, Sean.
Commenting by HaloScan
