Question for Catholics re: witholding sacraments to Catholic politicians

[ugarte]

Kerry has been taking heat from some Catholic quarters for his
pro-choice positions.  Some bishops urge that Kerry even be
denied sacraments.

As a Catholic myself, I find this doctrinal intrusion into the
public arena by the Catholic Church to be not only a very bad
idea and an extremly slippery slope, but also outrageously
hypocritical, since these same self-righteous voices do not
seem to have a similar problem with Catholic politicians who
suppport the death penalty, which is also opposed by the
Church.

Why are not similar calls made by Catholic religious to bar
from sacraments Catholic governors who execute people?  As
long as they're the ones bringing it up...

[prodigal_green]

1. Every priest I've ever heard

opposes the death penalty.

But you're right, the ones that come out to say anything at all are pretty selective about whom they criticize.

[deportivoI]

29. Name A Catholic

Governor and we can get the answer

[Hobo]

50. Ed Rendell of PA

is Catholic

[bleedingheart]

51. Rendell is a Jew

http://www.jewishsf.com/bk020517/us02.shtml

The late governor Casey was a Catholic and he was adamantly pro-life which is why I didn't vote for him or his kid.

[LynneSin]

61. Tom Ridge is also a Catholic and he was a pro-choice governor...

mind you he was a repuke, but at least he was pro-choice

[PA Democrat]

86. Tom Ridge was also very pro death penalty

He signed 220 death warrants while governor, and I believe there were 3 executions while he was governor. I think a politician has more control over whether a convicted criminal is executed than he does over women choosing to have an abortion.

[demosincebirth]

60. Schwartznegger

[dsc]

71. This is a historical example

but Robert Martinez was governor of Florida in the 1980's. During which time, not only did he favor the death penalty but he campaigned on it. His bishop at the time had no problem whatsoever. The very same bishop later became the bishop of Brooklyn, which made him Mario Cuomo'a bishop. The very same bishop publicly refused to give communion to Cuomo due to Cuomo's pro choice position.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

2. I think the Catholic Church should be taking care of its pedophile priests

and not worry about a politician receiving the sacrament.

[sniffa]

5. bingo!

but more importantLy, they need to figure out how to repLace the money they Lost due to that.

[demosincebirth]

62. Takes time

They are taking care of that the best they can, whether you believe it or not. Its an issue that has to be identified and taken care of as these priest's accusers come forward.



This thread starts to sound like a typical fundamentalist anti-Catholic site!

Lets remember who the enemy is, fellas...huh?

[still_one]

3. but sacraments are ok for child molesters...

[ugarte]

9. Exactly my point

I am only pointing out the inconsistency here.

[K-W]

4. Blame the media, not the church.

I am not catholic, but my mother is an active catholic and we had a long discussion about this. The catholic church has been getting gradually more politically active in recent years and thus this has become an issue. The catholic churc is active on the death penalty and also in social justice isssues. I think the problem here is that the media is only asking them questions about abortion. Plus you get conservative catholics and attention hungry catholics taking advantage of this to get their message across or get airtime in the news. It isnt like the Pope is saying these things, all the people ive seen are more obscure catholic theologians.

[LeahMira]

19. Good point! Do their clergy talk about social justice?

The catholic church has been getting gradually more politically active in recent years and thus this has become an issue. The catholic churc is active on the death penalty and also in social justice isssues. I think the problem here is that the media is only asking them questions about abortion.

That's a very good point!

The Catholic bishops in the US published a document on economic justice back in 1986. We had to read it for a class (great course on Christianity and Capitalism!), and it's an amazing document. There's a lot of reference to Jesus, etc. which a non-Christian needs to sort of read past, but there's no question but that the Catholics should be working for social and economic justice in a serious way here in the US.

I asked my Catholic cousins if they were familiar with this document, or if their priests had talked about it in church, but they had not heard of it. So, what's going on when Catholics pray at every service to end abortions, but no one even mentions what they are urged to do in the area of economic justice and social justice?

[Loonman]

6. But you can diddle kids to your heart's content

Buttheads.

[Scurrilous]

7. John Kerry is being criticized...

...for not following the Pope's teachings on birth-control and abortion. Good to see a Catholic candidate for the presidency being slammed for not being beholden to Rome instead of the other way around.

[RaulGroom]

38. Exactly right

This probably helps Kerry, on balance. That's the politics side.

On the theology side, in Catholicism sin and reconciliation are between the sinner and God, and that relationship is mediated by the Church. There is NO obligation for a Catholic lay person to publicly denounce or outlaw any sin, including performing abortions, masturbation, premarital sex, eating meat on Fridays, etc etc. If Kerry were to actually perform an abortion and then show up for the eucharist without having confessed, there might be some argument here, but in practice no baptized catholic is ever denied the eucharist, and truth be told, if a Protestant were to show up at most catholic churches and get in line to receive eucharist, she would receive it, even though this is technically incorrect according to papal law.

Just a dumb, dumb episode.

[SemperEadem]

55. It's time that the American Catholic Church break from Rome

Since the Pope isn't inclined to protect children from the "new indulgences"--the sexually predatory priests (or physically abusive nuns--more my experience as a female catholic child) in this country, then it's time that he be relegated to insignificance in this country with a break from Rome.

Either we as a country ante up the zero tolerance of child sexual predators in all corners of American life or we're a bunch of posturing hypocrits--like the Roman Catholic clergy is.

England had the right idea in 1532 and 1558. It's time we followed suit here in the 21st century.

[ugarte]

8. I understand there are a lot of anti-Catholics

I am not one of them. I am Catholic myself as are millions of Democratic voters. My only point in raising this issue is that progressive Catholics need to challenge the reactionaries.

If a politician can be barred from sacraments by taking a single position contrary to Church teaching, then why not at least be even-handed about it. If one proclaims to be a pro-life Catholic, that cannot include executing people.

[K8-EEE]

10. The Head Of Bush's Church Opposed The War...

and called it immoral and I don't hear anybody telling him he can't go to church or do this or that sacrament. BOGUS!!!

[doni_georgia]

93. UMC opposes death penalty as well

as other restrictions on personal freedom. From the UMC book of discipline (www.umc.org):
We also strongly reject domestic surveillance and intimidation of political opponents by governments in power and all other misuses of elective or appointive offices. The use of detention and imprisonment for the harassment and elimination of political opponents or other dissidents violates fundamental human rights. Furthermore, the mistreatment or torture of persons by governments for any purpose violates Christian teaching and must be condemned and/or opposed by Christians and churches wherever and whenever it occurs. For the same reason, we oppose capital punishment and urge its elimination from all criminal codes.


Bush needs to read his denomination's stand on many issues - here's more:
We honor the witness of pacifists who will not allow us to become complacent about war and violence. We also respect those who support the use of force, but only in extreme situations and only when the need is clear beyond reasonable doubt, and through appropriate international organizations. We urge the establishment of the rule of law in international affairs as a means of elimination of war, violence, and coercion in these affairs.

[kodi]

11. the blessed sacraments are not intended as cudgels to force behavior

they are expressions of God's love and they belong to God, not man.

those who would deny the sacraments to others who act in good conscience are no better than taliban.

[ugarte]

12. You are right

That is why liberal Catholics must oppose this Kerry-bashing.

[nuxvomica]

13. Any bishop who proposes denying the sacraments

Should be excommunicated. This is contrary to the spirit of Catholic teaching. It would be like denying medicine to the sick. Give Kerry all the eucharist he wants and if the grace of God doesn't change his opinion then maybe his opinion is not in conflict with God's.

[robcon]

20. That's not true.

Although not public or enforced, people like my sister, who have divorced and remarried, are supposed to be denied the sacraments. It's a common thing, although rarely announced, to implicitly deny sacraments to Catholics who publicly deny church teachings.

There is no church teaching on capital punishment, although many church leaders have publicly announced their own positions on this issue. Popes have announced their position on abortion ex-cathedra (speaking on an issue of faith or morals) so it is a bedrock of Catholic teaching. That is not true of capital punishment.

[ugarte]

33. There is a difference, however

Between advocating for abortion and believing in freedom of choice. By voting to leave the decision in the hands of a woman, Kerry does not argue in favor of abortion.

[spanone]

14. This is unbelievable. Kerry should tell the church where to stick it!

When the church gets a conscience and only then will they even have a hint of credibility when it comes to politics. Keep you pedophilic hands out of politics.

[cap]

15. a few thoughts...

Here is an extreme comparison: Catholic priests go into prisons and give communion to murderers, thieves, etc. even serial killers. If abortion is murder, why are they treating it differently.

If witholding Communion is seen as a political endorsement of a particular party, the Church is in danger of losing its tax free status.

[ugarte]

16. I wish we could ask the archbishop of St. Louis this question

He's the one who started all this by saying he wouldn't give Kerry communion.

[powergirl]

17. THE CATHOLIC CHURCH ITSELF DID NOT SUGGEST

excommunicating politicians who are pro choice. There are a few bishops in this country who pine for the days when they actually had authority. These bishops do not have the authority to deny communion to anyonre. Do they deny communtion to death penalty supporters, chickenhawks, and "welfare reform" advocates? The Popoe has specifically denounced those issues. I am Catholic and most of the Catholics I know will vote for Kerry because they are concerned about the human condition of this country. Bush has resulted in more homeless and poor. Catholics don't like that and advocate for real compassion and assistance for these souls.

[ugarte]

18. I couldn't agree more

God bless.

[goddess40]

22. Tax the church

I say if the Catholic church wants to dictate who they back for elections they should pay taxes on their extensive property holdings. The St. Louis bishop was previously in Wisconsin and stirred up so much discord we were happy he left. He also said he would refuse Congressman Dave Obey communion. This is funny as Dave is not pro choice but says he must support the law and he does. I heard that same bishop angered the people in St. Louis recently. It had something to do with usurping money from the Polish Catholic churches. Sorry I don't have the full info on this.

[ugarte]

24. Sounds like people are getting onto him

He's totally out of line.

[LeahMira]

23. Give up its tax-free status??!!! Good grief!

If witholding Communion is seen as a political endorsement of a particular party, the Church is in danger of losing its tax free status.

I don't see it that way. I see the Catholic church as sort of a club. If you want to be a member, then you have to follow the rules and regulations, and if you don't want to follow them then you either leave gracefully or get kicked out less gracefully.

I think the Catholic Church is more concerned about his public statements on issues. I doubt they really care what he does or thinks in private, so long as it doesn't reflect back on the Church. That seems to be how they were with the priests who molested children... they hushed it up.

Maybe Senator Kerry needs to have a private chaplain to travel with him so no one knows whether he takes communion or not?

[kiahzero]

83. You may not, but the law may

Churches are only tax exempt so long as they are non-partisan. If it crosses over into a partisan organization (like the Christian Coalition), it may (and should) lose its tax-free status.

[Just Me Here]

87. The Chursh isn't being partisan.

The Church is deciding what it will accept and not accept from it's members that CHOOSE to show up each Sunday.

If John Kerry wants the Catholic Church to stop giving him input on morality there only one thing he needs to do, leave the church. Of course, that's exactly what the Catholic Church is saying.

He could CHOOSE to do that any time he wants but he doesn't.

[kiahzero]

114. That is exactly like supporting candidates from the pulpit

Leaders of the church are not permitted to use the church to campaign for or against candidates. Doing so will cause their church to lose its tax-free status - this was the problem with distributing Christian Coalition voter guides in churches.

[Just Me Here]

116. THEY AREN'T TELLING PEOPLE WHO TO VOTE FOR

They are telling an individual member of their church that they will not tolerate him openly and actively undermining the beliefs of the church.

If they told the rest of the congregation not to vote for Kerry because he supports abortion rights, it would be a different issue. However, they aren't doing that. They are telling an individual member who CHOOSES to participate in the Church what they will and will not accept.

[kiahzero]

118. Exactly

Thank you for making my case for me.

They are telling an individual member who CHOOSES to participate in the Church what they will and will not accept.

Leaders of the Church are saying that if you disagree with them on public policy, you are not / should not be a member of the Church. How is that not partisan politicking?

[Just Me Here]

119. What?

"Leaders of the Church are saying that if you disagree with them on public policy, you are not / should not be a member of the Church. How is that not partisan politicking?"

Do you have ANY idea what religion is?

Are you saying that the Church should have to accept any beliefs whatsoever because otherwise they are being partisan? If somebody who gets on TV and claims that Bush is Jesus Christ reincarnated, would it be partisan for the church to tell that person they need to get their beliefs straight before accepting communion?

The separation of church and state goes both ways. Not only can the church not tell the government how to act (it's not in this case, it's telling a MEMBER who CHOOSES to attend what they will and will not accept), but the government cannot tell the church how to act. Just the fact that the Church has standards for its members doesn't make them partisan.

[kiahzero]

122. Yes, thank you

Let's try this again.

"Leaders of the Church are saying that if you disagree with them on public policy, you are not / should not be a member of the Church. How is that not partisan politicking?"

Note the bold words public policy.

The separation of church and state goes both ways. Not only can the church not tell the government how to act (it's not in this case, it's telling a MEMBER who CHOOSES to attend what they will and will not accept), but the government cannot tell the church how to act.

Tax exempt status is an unfortunate but necessary blurring of this line - if the government can tax churches, it has power over churches. If there is no test for tax exempt status, there's a blatent loophole for partisan organizations.

I'll look for the legal guidelines when I get a chance.

[Just Me Here]

123. Not quite what they are saying.

"Leaders of the Church are saying that if you disagree with them on public policy, you are not / should not be a member of the Church. How is that not partisan politicking?"

They aren't telling him that he can't disagree. He could disagree and nobody would notice.

They are telling him that they will not put up with pretending to follow the teaching of the Church and then publicly support, campaign for, and be proud of his support for ideals that are a complete opposite of what the Church believes on an extremely important issue.

Again, he doesn't have to call himself a Catholic. If he doesn't agree with the Church on such a life/human-rigts issue, why does he even care what the Church says? Why would he even call himself a Catholic or ask for communion when he knows what it means?

[kiahzero]

124. You are conflating two issues.

They are telling him that they will not put up with pretending to follow the teaching of the Church and then publicly support, campaign for, and be proud of his support for ideals that are a complete opposite of what the Church believes on an extremely important issue.

Again, he doesn't have to call himself a Catholic. If he doesn't agree with the Church on such a life/human-rigts issue, why does he even care what the Church says? Why would he even call himself a Catholic or ask for communion when he knows what it means?

Since when does being Catholic require the attempt to use the force of law to compel everyone else to be Catholic?

John Kerry, to wit, is personally against abortion, just as he is personally against gay marriage. That doesn't mean that he supports the kind of theocracy that these bishops and President Bush do.

[Just Me Here]

125. We're going around circles and not listening.

"Since when does being Catholic require the attempt to use the force of law to compel everyone else to be Catholic?"

When did I say it does? I would really like to see which comment I made that even insinuates that.

I said that the Church has certain doctrines that define it. Those doctrines are based on the Bible, not whether the Church wants to support the Republican or Democratic parties.

If the Church is not allowed to turn people away that openly and proudly CAMPAIGN AGAINST that doctrine why even have a doctrine to start? Why even have religion for that matter if the church has to accept even those people who openly fight against its beliefs?

Why even call yourself a Catholic if you are going to openly support the direct enemies of the Church such as NARAL?

[kiahzero]

126. You insinuated it

They are telling him that they will not put up with pretending to follow the teaching of the Church and then publicly support, campaign for, and be proud of his support for ideals that are a complete opposite of what the Church believes on an extremely important issue.

Again, he doesn't have to call himself a Catholic. If he doesn't agree with the Church on such a life/human-rigts issue, why does he even care what the Church says? Why would he even call himself a Catholic or ask for communion when he knows what it means?

It's not that Kerry does not agree with the Church on doctrine. It's that Kerry does not agree with the Church about whether that doctrine should be forcibly applied upon all Americans, Catholic or not.

If the Church is not allowed to turn people away that openly and proudly CAMPAIGN AGAINST that doctrine why even have a doctrine to start? Why even have religion for that matter if the church has to accept even those people who openly fight against its beliefs?

Why even call yourself a Catholic if you are going to openly support the direct enemies of the Church such as NARAL?

Here again, you insinuate it.

Church doctrine is not that abortion should be illegal, it is that abortion is immoral. Legality and morality are two separate spheres, that need not intersect.

[Just Me Here]

127. Legality and Morality don't Intersect?

The Catholic Church believes that abortion is murder. Murder is something that there are laws on in just about every single nation on this planet. If the Catholic Church should ignore a life and death issue (it is to them, even if you don't agree) why should it even exist?

"Legality and morality are two separate spheres, that need not intersect."

You just made an argument to throw out about 2/3 of the laws that exist in this and most other nations in the world. Morality and legality are so intertwined that it's essentially imposible to argue the law or even consider new laws without first considering the morality of them.

What leads you to think that law has ever been free of morality?

[kiahzero]

130. No, not necessarily.

And the fact that he openly and proudly promotes and votes for causes that go directly against that doctrine.

If the Catholic Church doctrine is political, it loses its tax-free status.

The Catholic Church believes that abortion is murder. Murder is something that there are laws on in just about every single nation on this planet. If the Catholic Church should ignore a life and death issue (it is to them, even if you don't agree) why should it even exist?

Because that would be forcing Catholicism upon non-Catholics.

For the record, murder is not prohibited because there are religious commandments against it. Murder is prohibited because it infringes on the rights of others.

You just made an argument to throw out about 2/3 of the laws that exist in this and most other nations in the world. Morality and legality are so intertwined that it's essentially imposible to argue the law or even consider new laws without first considering the morality of them.

What leads you to think that law has ever been free of morality?

I said that they "need not" intersect... meaning that there is nothing that requires all lawful actions to be moral, nor anything to require that all immoral actions to be unlawful.

The Church is free to hold that abortion is immoral, and that Catholics should not have abortions. There may even be a case that Catholic doctors should not perform abortions. However, campaigning for Catholic dogma to be forcibly instituted into our government is an anathema to the First Amendment.

It makes me laugh that you are making the argument you are, because it seems like you don't want Catholics in government at all. I know I wouldn't vote for any person who is simply going to be a cipher for a religion, and I'm willing to bet that others feel the same way. Look at how hard it was for Kennedy to get around the idea of him being at the Pope's beck and call - you seem to support Catholic politicians being governed by the Pope.

[Just Me Here]

134. Religious Freedom

How is a religious doctrine that existed one heck of a lot longer than Roe V Wade now solely a political issue and no longer a religious issue?

"The Church is free to hold that abortion is immoral, and that Catholics should not have abortions. There may even be a case that Catholic doctors should not perform abortions."

Then why are they not free to make decisions on who they give the sacrament to?

"However, campaigning for Catholic dogma to be forcibly instituted into our government is an anathema to the First Amendment."

Have you not read a SINGLE thing I've said? They aren't telling him to 'forcibly institute' the doctrine. They are telling him that if he is going to actively campaign AGAINST the doctrine they will not give him communion. You don't have to 'forcibly insitute' doctrine in order to not openly campaign against it.

How is a church deciding who it will and who it will not give communion to IN THEIR OWN WALLS IN A RELIGIOUS CEREMONY a political and not religious issue?

How is politics invading the Church to tell it who it has to give communion to not a violation of the 1st ammendment but the Church deciding which of it's MEMBERS WHO CHOOSE TO ATTEND it will give communion to a violation?

Why does Kerry even choose to attend?

[kiahzero]

142. Yes, I have read what you have said.

Have you not read a SINGLE thing I've said? They aren't telling him to 'forcibly institute' the doctrine. They are telling him that if he is going to actively campaign AGAINST the doctrine they will not give him communion. You don't have to 'forcibly insitute' doctrine in order to not openly campaign against it.

Supporting choice is not "openly campaigning" against Catholic doctrine, unless Catholic doctrine is political.

How is a church deciding who it will and who it will not give communion to IN THEIR OWN WALLS IN A RELIGIOUS CEREMONY a political and not religious issue?

It's a political issue when its done for political reasons.

How is politics invading the Church to tell it who it has to give communion to not a violation of the 1st ammendment but the Church deciding which of it's MEMBERS WHO CHOOSE TO ATTEND it will give communion to a violation?

Why does Kerry even choose to attend?

The Church is free to refuse communion for solely political reasons. However, that would probably (IANA CPA) put it outside 501(c)(3) status and make it at risk for paying taxes.

The Church deciding which members to give communion to is clearly not a violation of the First Amendment, since it is a limitation on the actions of the government. Please point out to me where I argued that the Church becoming a political institution would violate the First Amendment?

As for Kerry choosing to attend Catholic mass, it may have something to do with the fact that he believes in the Catholic faith.

[Just Me Here]

143. .............

"The Church is free to refuse communion for solely political reasons. However, that would probably (IANA CPA) put it outside 501(c)(3) status and make it at risk for paying taxes."

Again, do you only see political issues? Are religions allowed to have stances on issues without being called political orgnanizations? Is the Church supposed to stop having an opinion on a religious issue if it ever becomes a political issue? Can the Church not tell it's members its stance on religious issues that become political issues?

Abortion was a religious issue in the Church one heck of a lot earlier than it was a political issue. They are telling one of the people WHO CHOOSES TO ATTEND the Church what they will and will not do for him IN RELIGIOUS CERMONIES on RELIGIOUS GROUNDS. How does deciding what to expect from members who CHOOOSE TO ATTEND THE CHURCH become a political statement?

If you can't tell, I'm pointing out the "CHOOSE TO ATTEND" quite often. Kerry CHOSE to join the Catholic Church. Why is the Church not allowed to tell members who CHOOSE to attend what they will and will not accept from their members on deeply religious issues?

Tell me this,

If a Muslim mosque decided to refuse Kerry services because he is openly a Christian, should it have its religious organization status revoked?

If a Jewish synagogue decided to refuse Kerry services because he accepts Christ as his savior, should they have their religious status revoked?

What’s the difference? In this case a Church is telling Kerry they will not grant him communion IN THEIR OWN PRIVATE RELIGIOUS FACILITY because of his actions that act directly against the Church.

[kiahzero]

146. Re: .........

Again, do you only see political issues? Are religions allowed to have stances on issues without being called political orgnanizations? Is the Church supposed to stop having an opinion on a religious issue if it ever becomes a political issue? Can the Church not tell it's members its stance on religious issues that become political issues?

Of course the Church is allowed to have stances on political issues. I fail to see where I said they could not. My point, the whole time, is that the Church is turning a religious ceremony (communion) into a political one, by determining who is worthy based on their voting record.

Abortion was a religious issue in the Church one heck of a lot earlier than it was a political issue. They are telling one of the people WHO CHOOSES TO ATTEND the Church what they will and will not do for him IN RELIGIOUS CERMONIES on RELIGIOUS GROUNDS. How does deciding what to expect from members who CHOOOSE TO ATTEND THE CHURCH become a political statement?

If you can't tell, I'm pointing out the "CHOOSE TO ATTEND" quite often. Kerry CHOSE to join the Catholic Church. Why is the Church not allowed to tell members who CHOOSE to attend what they will and will not accept from their members on deeply religious issues?

The Church is the one that is combining religion with politics - the Bishop is arguing that voting a certain way is a sin. It is free to say that abortion is wrong, obviously, and is of course free to prevent members from taking part in a religious ceremony because they violated religious teachings.

For you to claim that refusing Kerry communion falls into this category, you have to argue that voting not to give Catholic doctrine the force of law is against the Catholic religion. As I said previously, this is what MAY put the Church into trouble.

If a Muslim mosque decided to refuse Kerry services because he is openly a Christian, should it have its religious organization status revoked?

If a Jewish synagogue decided to refuse Kerry services because he accepts Christ as his savior, should they have their religious status revoked?

No, because both of those are religious distinctions.

What’s the difference? In this case a Church is telling Kerry they will not grant him communion IN THEIR OWN PRIVATE RELIGIOUS FACILITY because of his actions that act directly against the Church.

No, the Bishop is trying to tell Kerry that he will not be granted communion because he will not try to enforce Church doctrine upon people who are not Catholic.

I have a hypothetical for you - if voting for choice is against Catholic doctrine, wouldn't that mean that voting for someone who will vote for choice is also against Catholic doctrine?

[Just Me Here]

147. ....

"No, the Bishop is trying to tell Kerry that he will not be granted communion because he will not try to enforce Church doctrine upon people who are not Catholic."

Maybe this is where the confusion is coming from. The Church is telling Kerry that they will not grant him communion (which again is a RELIGIOUS NOT POLITICAL ceremony held on RELIGIOUS NOT PUBLIC grounds) because he actively campaigngs AGAINST the doctrine of the Catholic Church by actively supporting groups such as NARAL.

I think our problem is that you aren't accepting the difference between not openly supporting organizations such as NARAL and trying the enforce Church doctrine on people who are not Catholic.

This isn't the first time the Church has said it has Biblical standards it will not compromise. The Church has taken steps like this in the past with members of Catholics for Choice.

They aren't saying that he has to vote a certain way. The church got over that a long time ago (they had to for JFK Jr.). Churches are not allowed to endorse candidates or tell their members how to vote and that is not what they are doing here. They are telling Kerry that if he is going ACTIVELY and PROUDLY campaign against the doctrine of the Church they will not grant him communion in their facilities.

Should the Church have to grant anybody communion regardless of what they do outside the church? There really isn't much of a difference between that and the Jewish and Islamic examples I gave. It's also what you are arguing the Church should have to do if it wants to remain a religious and not political organization.

From what I can tell, you don't expect the Church to have any influence on the lives of its members (again, who CHOOSE to participate in the Church) once they leave the doors of the Church. Actually you don't want the Church to be allowed to have influence on its members even when they are still in the church building.

May I ask what you think religion even exists for?

[Just Me Here]

128. ...

"It's that Kerry does not agree with the Church about whether that doctrine should be forcibly applied upon all Americans, Catholic or not."

And the fact that he openly and proudly promotes and votes for causes that go directly against that doctrine.

[LeahMira]

136. Not what's happening... and some stats

Since when does being Catholic require the attempt to use the force of law to compel everyone else to be Catholic?

I don't think that's what is happening. If Senator Kerry intends to remain in good standing with the Catholic Church then he is not permitted to publicly support abortion or do anything that directly makes it possible for abortions to happen. That seems to mean that he can choose to be either a candidate who supports choice or a person in good standing with the Catholic Church. Apparently, he can't be both. He has to pick one or the other. The Catholic Church has publicly excommunicated the leaders of groups like "Catholics for Free Choice" that do support choice. Some bishop could excommunicate Kerry. It wouldn't be a good move after all the stuff about the priest molesters, but they could do it just to show their authority.

The Catholics are not saying that everyone else has to be Catholic. They are just saying that those who claim to be Catholic have to be Catholic. Being Catholic apparently means doing as the Catholic Church instructs, i.e. not giving public support to abortion or doing anything that directly makes it possible for abortions to happen. My guess is that when Kerry is President, the Catholic Church would expect him to either veto any pro-choice legislation or at least to let it sit on his desk.

------------------

There are 50,873,000 who self-identify as Catholics in the US. Of these, 28% are Republicans, 36% are Democrats, 30% are Independent, and 4% are Other (maybe Green, maybe not registered, but some variety of other).

Of course, not all Catholics are "hard-line" Catholic... many may not pay particular attention to what the Pope or the Bishops have to say.

OTOH, the largest religious block of Democratic voters percentage-wise are the Jews. 56% of Jews self-identify as Democrats. However, the total number of Jews is only 2,831,000.

Republicans have heavy support among Mormons (55%), Assembly of God (59%), and the Evangelican/Born Again (58%). (Those are the ones over 50% Republicans.) Their total numbers, though, are 2,787,000 (Mormons), 1,105,000 (Assembly of God), and 1,032,000 (Evangelical/Born Again).



So, Kerry can look at the numbers and decide how many votes he could potentially lose over abortion and then weigh his choices.

I don't see Catholics as single-issue voters, but the abortion issue is and has been a big one for them over years. I'd guess that there would have to be some issues that really grab them and ones that Kerry takes a position that they strongly support to counterbalance the abortion issue. Personally, I don't see those issues as social or economic justice type issues. Catholics vote their pocketbooks as much as the next ones.

Of course, Bush could screw up and PO the Catholics really big time.

[Just Me Here]

47. Basics of Christianity

"If abortion is murder, why are they treating it differently."

It's called being remorseful for your sins and is one of the essential aspects of Christianity. If you ask for forgiveness of your sins you are granted it. However, if you ask for forgiveness of your sins and then actively support NARAL on Monday, it’s not hard to see where your heart truly is. It’s the same thing with prisoners, if they openly admit that they will go out and murder somebody the next day, the priest should not, and in most cases would not, offer communion.

(btw, I think the murderer comparison is bull shit, I’m just following up on your post)

Using your idea that any sinner doesn’t deserve communion would mean that the Catholic Church, or any church for that matter, shouldn’t even exist.

[wuushew]

66. Do you not accept certain rate of recidivism for crimes?

Obviously not all sexual crimes or murders result in life imprisonment. Knowing that future criminals are recieving forgiveness exposes the hyprocrasy of the Catholic Church.

Until they adopt an all or nothing approach the Church can stay the hell out of politics.

[Just Me Here]

68. Who's getting into who's business here?

Until they adopt an all or nothing approach the Church can stay the hell out of politics.

The Church isn't getting into politics, you are trying to force politics on the Church. It's acting in it's own arena, the Church.

If Kerry doesn't agree with the Catholic Church, why does he call himself a Catholic. It's HIS choice to call himself a Catholic, the Church has not authority to force him to follow the beliefs of Catholicism. If he doesn’t want to be judged by the Catholic Church, he shouldn’t call himself a Catholic.

Oh wait, that's exactly what the Church is saying.

[wuushew]

70. Are you voting for Kerry?

Because by your logic the number of abortions is far greater than the number of people killed in Iraq so Bush must be the lesser of two evils.

[Just Me Here]

73. No.

There's another thread that details why but I just can't bring myself to vote Democrat because of the abortion issue (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=1366543&mesg_id=1367267&page=). Like it or not, there are a lot of people like me.

In fact, there was a certain candidate your avatar indicates that you are familiar with who was perfect for people like me until he "conveniently" changed his position on abortion to run for president.

edit: You're implying that if I don't vote for Kerry, I have to vote for Bush? Are you really so stuck on a two party system that you don't realize there are other options?

[dawn]

76. Who will you vote for, then?

It has to be Roy Moore, or a write-in, because Nader, and whoever the Green Party will run will support a woman's right to choose.

[Just Me Here]

80. It's April

Isn't the election in November?

[wuushew]

90. Its always more pragmatic to vote Democratic

Because Clinton was good for the economy the number of abortions decreased during the 90's. Bush is destroying the economy. Therefore your principled stance accomplishes nothing. Vote Kerry, relieve your guilt and make other liberals happy.

[Just Me Here]

95. ???

How does who I vote for have anything to do with this conversation?

BTW, I'm in Texas any way. It's not like my vote one way or the other in the presidential race is going to do much. There's a reason Nader is campaigning here and not in the battle ground states. I've got three friends who would vote Kerry but have agreed to swap votes with Nader people in battle ground states. So if you're scared my vote may change the election, you can probably go ahead and sleep well at night knowing it won't.

[LeahMira]

139. How easy for you...

BTW, I'm in Texas any way. It's not like my vote one way or the other in the presidential race is going to do much.

Well, that's certainly convenient for you. You have the luxury of voting your religious conscience as well as your political conscience. Not all of us have that luxury. We have to choose... and unfortunately it always seems to come down to the lesser of two evils.

Since you don't have to deal with that dilemma, maybe you might try to have a bit more empathy for those of us who do need to deal with it, eh?

[PA Democrat]

92. What about letting millions die of AIDS in Africa

because bush won't stand up to the pharmaceutical industry to lower prices? Yeah, those campaign contributions are MUCH more important than peoples' lives. Did you know that Cheney undermined a deal that would have saved millions of lives of people, many of whom are children, from AIDS?

It must be simple to see everything in black and white.

[Just Me Here]

97. :(

Dude, seriously.

I NEVER SAID I WOULD VOTE FOR BUSH. I WON'T.

Please stop lumping me with 'the evil empire' or whatever you are trying to lump me with just because I don't agree with you on every issue.

[Just Me Here]

99. More.

I'm sorry but your post is just plain offensive. What is it about people who can't argue an issue without trying to lump the other side in with 'the enemy'?

I never said a single thing about AIDS but you have decided that it is now appropriate to claim I support the spread of AIDS in Africa.

[PA Democrat]

89. A one issue voter

Would you vote for a guy that would as soon let a baby STARVE after the mother gave birth? Or who thinks its OK to slaughter THOUSANDS of innocent children in an illegal war?

Do you really think that abortion did not occur before Roe v. Wade?

[Just Me Here]

91. Who said I would vote for Bush?

"Would you vote for a guy that would as soon let a baby STARVE after the mother gave birth? Or who thinks its OK to slaughter THOUSANDS of innocent children in an illegal war?"

Have you taken hook line and sinker to the idea of a two part election system?

"Do you really think that abortion did not occur before Roe v. Wade?"

Murder, theft, and pedophilia occured before they were outlawed as well. Do you really think we should legalize anything that happens even though it's illegal?

[wuushew]

94. It is a two party system

Very binary, Bush or Kerry

Perrot got 19% of the popular in 1992 but didn't carry a single state.
Not voting or voting third party DOES have an effect in swing states.

[Just Me Here]

96. Texas

"Not voting or voting third party DOES have an effect in swing states."

Texas is about as far from a swing state as it gets.

[wuushew]

101. You are voting in of the 32 Texas Congressional districts correct?

I don't want to hear any nonsense about living in a noncompetitive district. The GOP must be faught everywhere possible. By choosing apathy you are enabling the right. Which in turn hurts your favored cause.

http://www.opensecrets.org/states/election.asp?State=TX&year=2004

[Just Me Here]

103. How many times are you going to change the subject?

When I was talking about the Catholic Church not bending just because of Kerry, you decided I should talk about who I'm going to vote for in the presidential race.

Now that you know it doesn't matter who I vote for in the presidential race, you want to know who I'm going to vote for in the congressional races.

What happened to being open minded about it? Why should I have to know who I'm going to vote for in November in April?

You now know my stance on this. If you would like to discuss the topic of this thread let me know.

[PA Democrat]

98. Have you taken hook, line and sinker

that a third party candidate could be elected president?

[Just Me Here]

100. Nope.

You're point?

[dsc]

108. If they did that will all issues

then I wouldn't utter a peep. But they only do it with abortion and gay rights. Never with issues of poverty or the death penalty.

[LeahMira]

137. Religious identity... what exactly does it mean?

If Kerry doesn't agree with the Catholic Church, why does he call himself a Catholic. It's HIS choice to call himself a Catholic, the Church has not authority to force him to follow the beliefs of Catholicism. If he doesn’t want to be judged by the Catholic Church, he shouldn’t call himself a Catholic.

This is exactly the sort of thing I asked about a while ago over in the Lounge... and got the whole gamut of answers.

So what does it mean to say that you are a Catholic? or a Methodist? or a Presbyterian?

Does it mean that you are on the Church membership rolls? Does it mean that you regularly attend a particular Church? Do you have to be a member of an Episcopal congregation in order to be considered an Episcopalian?

I don't remember specifically who said what right now, but someone said that s/he was Methodist although s/he hadn't attended a service in years and didn't intend to attend one anytime in the near future.

I know there are even within a particular religious group clergy who have disagreements with some of the specifics. The case of the gay Episcopalian bishop is one such example.

I have a cousin who self-identifies as Catholic although he is married outside the Catholic Church. Still, he attends Sunday services every single week, observes all the fasting regulations, believes in all the doctrines and dogmas totally and without question, and insisted that his children be raised Catholic and participate in choir, CCD, and the rest.

So, it seems that there are different standards for membership in the various religious groups, and it seems that some people who self-identify as Catholics might not necessarily be considered Catholics by the hierarchy of the Catholic Church.

This is confusing to me, but I am Jewish and the Jewish community is also having "discussions" about who is a Jew these days. We Jews like to think that the issue of who is a Jew is clear-cut, but when we look back in our history over time we find that who is a Jew has changed over the centuries as well.

So, I wonder if maybe the issue of who is a Catholic might not depend on who you ask, and even on which day you ask that person?

Anyone?

[Yupster]

132. An all or nothing approach?

meaning you can't be a Catholic if you've sinned?

Well since we're all sinners, that would pretty much take care of the church's need for a tax exempt status at least.

[Yupster]

131. Probably because

forgivness of sins, and the act of confession are a big part of Catholic faith.

If a murderer has confessed his sins, and asked forgivness, he can be right with the church.

I'm sure if Kerry confessed that his pro-choice position was wrong, and changed to a pro-life position, the church would be more than happy to offer him their sacriments.

[Az]

21. This issue is the very center of the battle for women's rights

When you delve back through the history of the battle for women's rights you will find the Pope's supposed infallibility and the papal decree known as Humana Vitae. This is the official papal decree making birth control and abortion forbidden by the church.

The Vatican saw the Roe V Wade descision as the greatest threat to their position. The social force that the US carried could cause them undue discord. We had to be stopped. Thus they began a battle to undermine the US legal system and to this effect began a grass roots program to do so. They made connections within the protestant churches as well and taught them how to use this issue as a recruitment and financial windfall. Once the protestants were on board the rest was inevitable.

In the end what we have is an unstoppable force pitted against an immovable object. The Catholic Church has managed to dodge and spin for centuries attempting to maintain the purity of its infallibility claim. To date they have been largely succesful. However the Humana Vitae decree is caught between two eras.

Our society continuously changes. A religion must adapt or die. The Catholic Church has both resisted and adapted to what it could. Fortunately most social issues were not tied up in the Papal Infallibility claim (ie. slavery and womens voting rights). But Humana Vitae stepped into the whirlwind of social change. It fixed in stone (papal stone) a social value. Change comes and cannot be stopped. The Churches inflexibility on this point could destroy a key component of their faith. Without the declaration of infallibility the Pope becomes just some guy issuing fatwas. They cannot afford to lose this battle.

[LeahMira]

28. Oops!!!

The Catholic Church has managed to dodge and spin for centuries attempting to maintain the purity of its infallibility claim.

Actually, I believe that although papal infallibility was part of Church tradition, it wasn't a formal "official" part of dogma (that all Catholics are required to believe) until the middle 1800s.

Also, a lot of people think that everything the Pope says is automatically covered by the infallibility thing. It isn't! The Popes have to intend to speak infallibly and to formally state that they are speaking "from the Chair of Peter" when they issue a particular statement. I think there have only been three times in all of Church history when the Pope said something that was "from the Chair of Peter." One was when the Pope issued the infallibility statement, and the other two times had to do with Mary, mother of Jesus. I think those times were to say that Mary was conceived without original sin and that she went up to heaven both body and spirit... but Catholics can speak to that more accurately, I'm sure.

Anyhow, all the other things that the Catholic Church teaches are traditional beliefs and teachings that, theoretically, the Church could change its mind about whenever it wants to. It probably won't, but theoretically, it could (i.e. theoretically, there could be married priests or women priests... in fact, probably not till some cold day in July). I'm pretty sure that traditional body of teaching includes encyclicals also.

So the Catholic Church has only three infallible issues... the rest is commentary. :-)

[Az]

39. Retroactively

The context of Papal Infallibility is retroactive. It was only pronounced in the 1800s. It covers all previous decrees. Thus the dodging applies retroactively.

And yes, it is only on very specific issues where official pronouncements are made. The Pope is not covered by an ineffible error proof shield. He can still get things wrong at a personal level. But when he speaks on official Church position then his word is simply the truth of how things are. Unchangeable. Unalterable. And this makes it very tricky to be the Pope in a time of constantly changing social values.

[Redleg]

25. Unfair to withhold Eucharist for pro-choice but not for disagreeing

with other church laws.

[readmylips]

26. Sacraments ok for Bishop who killed, to give and take...

so God forgives the Bishop and condems Kerry. Those Catholic professional politicians are selling propaganda.

[ugarte]

27. Catholics for Kerry

Maybe there should be an organization. Maybe there already is.

[Tracer]

30. Sen. Rick Santorum (R. Catholic) favors the death penalty.

Maybe his local bishop ought to be withholding the sacraments from HIM.

Theoretically, as a divorced Catholic, the church shouldn't allow me to receive the Eucharist either Ñ but I've never, ever, ever heard of this happening.

[robcon]

34. Death penalty is not a church teaching.

There has been no official church teaching on the death penalty. Catholics are free to advocate any position on the death penalty, and, for example, bishops have taken differing opinions on the issue without censorship by the church.

There is a huge difference between abortion and the death penalty, as far as church teachings are concerned. Abortion is a matter of firm church teaching, the death penalty is not.

[trogdor]

36. The Pope has come out against the Death Penalty years ago.

Last I heard, what he says goes.

[Just Me Here]

46. One Million Innocent Children vs Well Less Than 1,000 Convicted Criminals.

Look at it the way the church does, considering aborted children deaths...

There are around one million abortions performed each year in the United States. The amount of executions of doesn’t even come close to one percent of one percent of that number. I guess you can call going after abortion first a matter of efficiency.

[wuushew]

69. When did the Bible or the Pope rank sins?

By your logic the "super" sin of the Holocaust should have recieved the Church's full attention during WWII, but alas history reveals a differnt story.

Also if we look at actions which maximize the survial/lives of the human race, why is population control demonized when the goal is too maximize human survival over time? Mass overpopulation leads to mass die off. Sustainability often requires actions that religion/conservatives feel inappropriate. My observation is that intent is more important than action when in reality the inverse should be true.

[Just Me Here]

72. Ugh.

Look, I know you are going to use any little mundane argument you can to prove that the Catholic Church should just ignore the abortion issue because somebody did something else wrong somewhere else. The fact is, there are a factor of 1,000 times more children impacted by abortion than convicted criminals impacted by capital punishment each year.

Do I believe in captial punishment? Hell no.

Am I willing to put off the fight against the murder of far less than 1,000 convited criminals a year until we get rid of a practice that takes away the chance to be born from around ONE MILLION unborn children a year? Hell yes.

"Also if we look at actions which maximize the survial/lives of the human race, why is population control demonized when the goal is too maximize human survival over time?"

I agree with you but check my earlier posts, I'm not Catholic, just Pro-Life.

The fact remains that Kerry CHOOSES to call himself a Catholic. If he doesn't want their input why does he continue to even ask for communion?

[powergirl]

49. YOUR ARE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT

The serious Catholic believes in the infallibility of the Pope. Therefore, if the Pope condemns the Death Penalty, then Catholics (and I am one) must agree with him and support that position. So, basically, if Rick Santorum wants to "go there," he is defying the authority of the Pope - which isn't all that Catholic - as he purports to be.

[robcon]

78. YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY WRONG

The church has given no direction to Catholics what the church's position on capital punishment is. The Pope is against it... he's probably against a lot of things... but he has not written an encyclical outlining what Catholic teaching is.

Catholics are free to act their conscience on capital punishment, either for or against.

edit:spell

[rpannier]

154. I asked a friend of mine who's studying in Rome

I have a friend who is studying for the Priesthood at the Vatican and yes the Pope has issued edicts against the death penalty. Church members are no more free to support the death penalty as they are to support abortion. Next time check your facts.

[robcon]

77. Being against something is not the same

as saying it is an expression of the faith and morals of the church. If the Pope favors the Juventus soccer team (to take a ludicrous example) that doesn't make supporting Juventus as a teaching of the church. There has been no encyclical or formal document expressing the Church's position on capital punishment. Catholics are free to think what they like on capital punishment.

This is very unlike the church's teaching on abortion.

[trogdor]

35. Find out where he attends Mass.

Send his pastor a nice letter. I think if I lived in DC, I'd go there myself and strike up a conversation him about certain Catholics who claim to be pro-life yet support the Death Penalty.

[salin]

37. You raise a great question per divorce

are these same Bishops going to advocate withholding sacraments for divorced Catholic politicians who have not been granted an annulment? What about Rudy Guilani - did he get two annulments? What about his moving the then girlfriend in while still married (and while being a very high profile public servant)? I would guess that in Congress there more than a few divorced Catholics... and that is about their personal practice, not about a political position. This really could turn around on those Bishops trying to push politics through the Church.

[Bunny]

41. Have you remarried?

If so, then theoretically you cannot receive the sacraments. But if you have not remarried, you are still considered married in the eyes of the church and can receive sacraments. The key with divorced Catholics is whether of not they've remarried.

You probably knew this, I'm just pointing it out for any non-Catholics on board who maybe didn't realize this.

[salin]

43. Thanks

non-Catholic here, and when I read this... I thought.. oh ya, I have heard that before... but needed the reminder/clarification. It is the second marraige that is an issue (if not annulled) rather than the divorce itself that is a nono. Thanks

[Bunny]

44. Exactly.

You've gotta get that annulment if you want to get remarried and remain a Catholic in good standing.

[trogdor]

31. When you have bishops saying...

..."you can't be a good Catholic and vote for Candidate X," the Church as stepped over the line between being a religious organization and a political one.

They've put Kerry in an awkward position where he might have to take on the Church. Yes, many American Catholics are of the "cafeteria" variety, but if JK gets excommunicated or leaves the church on principle, that would be bad. It might even be bad if he has to make some kind of statement calling the bishops on their un-American activities, if it isn't done right.

The Church also stands for social justice. It would be a damned shame if that gets thrown out the window over wedge issues like abortion.

[billybob537]

32. Turn the other cheek!

there is no hypocrisy too huge for the catholic church to embrace.O8)

[robcon]

79. You are a bigot, billybob537.

Disgusting.

[leftchick]

40. I am Catholic and found my bushbot parish priest a hypocrite....

In the run up to the invasion he was all about "support our president", "pray for our president as he works for peace." .. blah blah, all that right wing crap of war = peace. I ended up leaving and finding a parish with a great priest who does not bring up politics in his sermons. That is the bottom line for me. Mass is a spiritual moment between you and God. There is no reason to bring politics into it.

[ugarte]

42. I also object to the 'pray for our troops' business

when they do not also mention Iraqis. I guess the message is that some lives are worth more than others.

[amandak]

53. phewie

good thing i read your post before replying...b/c i was gonna say there is nothing wrong w/ praying for our troops, especially ones that are deployed (my df is in afghan right now)

but you have a point...we need to be praying for the iraqis and afghanis and not just our soldiers.

[Just Me Here]

45. Other way around.

First, I'm not a Catholic, just Pro-Life. However,

As a Catholic myself, I find this doctrinal intrusion into
the public arena by the Catholic Church to be not only a very
bad idea and an extremly slippery slope, but also...

You're mixing up doctrinal intrusion into the public arena with the public arena intruding on doctrine. The Catholic Church isn't telling politicians how to vote. They got over that idea during JFK Jr. when it was really necessary because of all the anti-Catholic ideas that the Pope would run the United States if we ever elected a Catholic president.

However, what the Catholic Church is saying is that they don’t have to give communion to somebody in their church who is going to leave the doors of the church to support NARAL and campaign for Pro-Choice issues. It’s their right to decide who they will give the sacrament to.

If Kerry wants to go to a quasi-Catholic church that has decided that public opinion is more important than the doctrine of the church (like he did last week) that is also his right.

The separation of church and state goes both ways. Not only does it mean that the church can’t tell the government how to operate, but it also means that the church doesn’t have to throw it’s doctrine out the window just because some it’s members are running for office in a party that champions an issue that is 180 degrees from it’s beliefs.

Regarding the death penalty, there are one million abortions performed each year in the United States. The amount of executions of doesn’t even come close to one percent of one percent of that number. I guess you can call going after abortion first a matter of efficiency.

[ugarte]

52. If you're still around, see my post #33

Even if I buy into what you say, a big problem I have is equating pro-choice with pro-abortion. How does support for allowing a woman to decide mean that I (as a pro-choice voter, for example, or Kerry as a politician) advocate abortion.

It's the same fallacy that says if I oppose the Drug War, I must be in favor of people doing drugs.

I have never read that Kerry has said he would encourage someone to have an abortion. Therefore, where is the sin?

[Just Me Here]

57. He Openly Supports Abortion Rights

"I have never read that Kerry has said he would encourage someone to have an abortion. Therefore, where is the sin?"

He actively votes in favor of allowing abortion to continue and actively supports such groups as NARAL. Can you not see where that's a spit on the face of the doctrine of the church?

Regardless, my question is if Kerry openly disagrees with the Catholic Churches well stated opinion on such an important issue as abortion, why does he continue to call himself Catholic?

Nobody forces him to attend mass. Nobody forces him to accept communion. He chooses to do so.

[shimmergal]

81. No, it's not a "spit on the face of the church."

If abortions are always such a grievous sin, the church should be able to persuade women not to have them, without having to use the "whip" of illegalizing them (which doesn't work anyway; it just results in more dead women).

The Catholic church also believes that salvation is only thru the R.C. church. But they're no longer trying to bring about this equally desirable result by making it illegal to belong to any other church (or none.)

[Just Me Here]

85. Why does the church have to change for Kerry?

"If abortions are always such a grievous sin, the church should be able to persuade women not to have them, without having to use the "whip" of illegalizing them"

Then why do we need the 'whip' of illegalizing murder, theft, pedophilia, purjury, or drug use? The church isn't concerned only for the lives of Catholic children. It's insane to think that if Catholic women didn't have abortions, the Catholic Church would be happy since it's only 'pagan' babies that never get the shot a life.

Again, if John Kerry doesn't beleive in the position of the Church on such an important issue (this is a life and death issue in the view of the Church) why does he even call himself a Catholic?

I see nobody forcing him to be a member the Church. However, I do see a bunch of posters here who want to force the Catholic Church to ingore their beleifs because one of their members is running for president as a Democrat.

[PA Democrat]

104. Let him who is without sin cast the first stone

Who said the church has to change for Kerry?

Who said that the bishop or priest has the right to throw the first stone by denying Kerry Communion? Christ didn't agree with this type of action.

Why is Kerry judged by a different standard than other Catholics? Are all other Catholics being required to state their beliefs on abortion or required to open up their financial records to prove they have never contributed to Planned Parenthood or some other pro-choice organization before they are given Communion?

This bishop is being POLITICAL. By choosing to publicly humiliate a pro-choice politician he is carrying out a POLITICAL act, unless he is consistent in his policy across all church teachings and across all church members.

[Just Me Here]

107. They didn't ask Kerry either.

"Are all other Catholics being required to state their beliefs on abortion or required to open up their financial records to prove they have never contributed to Planned Parenthood or some other pro-choice organization before they are given Communion?"

No they are not. But guess what, neither is Kerry.

The PUBLIC and open actions of Kerry that DIRECTLY undermine the doctrine of the Church on a large scale are what this is about.

Again, why should the Catholic Church be forced to overlook the public and open actions of John Kerry just because he is the Democratic Presidential candidate? Why is he even allowing this to be an issue?


Yet again, if he knows that he doesn't agree with an organization he is a member of on such a vital issue, why does he continue to attend?

[PA Democrat]

113. There are MANY Catholics who attend Mass

who do not agree with all of the church's teachings. Many Catholics, myself included, believe in a woman's reproductive rights. And NO, I will NOT stop attending Mass, because some MEN choose to interpret Christ's teachings to mean that a woman has no right to exercise birth control, let alone have an abortion.

[Just Me Here]

115. I see.

"And NO, I will NOT stop attending Mass, because some MEN choose to interpret Christ's teachings to mean that a woman has no right to exercise birth control, let alone have an abortion."

I understand now.

It's not exactly hard to understand how the Bible states that abortion is murder and it doesn't really matter what sex the person doing the reading is. If you are going to disagree with it just because of the sex of the leadership in the Church, that's you're right.

However, it might be a little less hypocrtical to pick a religion that is a little more open to whatever it is you want to believe. Christianity is based on the teachings of God and Jesus Christ. Why waste your time with it if you don't believe in what it teaches?

[PA Democrat]

121. Oh, I didn;t realize you were the Hypocrite police

oh great sanctimonious one.

[Just Me Here]

117. Definition of Cafeteria Catholic

Just FYI, when you hear people speaking of “Cafeteria Catholics” they are referring to you.

Absolution of sins? Hey, I’ll take some of that.

Communion? Sure, it’s been a week since I’ve had some of that.

The Holy Spirit? Sure, an extra helping if you don’t mind.

Doctrine on Abortion? Ick. I’ll pass.

[PA Democrat]

120. Guilty as charged along with millions of other "cafeteria" Catholics

But I have seen the results of the legislation and budget cuts enacted by some of these "pro-life" politicians, because I do a lot of volunteer work with disabled children and adults. The Catholic church is being used by many of these "pro-life" candidates because most of these guys have NO respect for life once it's out of the womb.

I don't like abortion, but I feel the best way to reduce abortion is by sex education, access to contraception, and living wages just for starters. If that makes me a sinner, so be it. I'm far from the first one this world has seen.

[LeahMira]

64. Selective enforcement?

However, what the Catholic Church is saying is that they don’t have to give communion to somebody in their church who is going to leave the doors of the church to support NARAL and campaign for Pro-Choice issues. It’s their right to decide who they will give the sacrament to.

I agree with the idea that they set the terms for membership and you either go with those terms or they can refuse to provide the benefits.

I don't get it why they insist that Catholics have to campaign against abortion. It seems to me that as long as Catholics themselves aren't involved in abortions, there's no reason why they need to say that the rest of us can't get abortions.

Their moral sense on that issue is different from mine, but as I see it the question boils down to whether it is possible for a moral Catholic person to live a moral life (as seen by Catholics) in what Catholics see as an immoral society. Since that society offers choices, I fail to understand their problem. Why can't they let the rest of us go cheerfully to hell?

Regarding the death penalty, there are one million abortions performed each year in the United States. The amount of executions of doesn’t even come close to one percent of one percent of that number. I guess you can call going after abortion first a matter of efficiency.

I wonder... are Catholics allowed by the Church laws to serve on a jury for a capital offense? Can a Catholic legislator vote to keep the death penalty in his/her state?

[Just Me Here]

67. ....

"I don't get it why they insist that Catholics have to campaign against abortion."

There is a difference between campaigning against abortion and openly and actively campaigning for abortion rights, supporting abortion rights organizations, and actively campaigning against restrictions on abortion.

When this came up with Daschle a few years back that was pointed out. The priest could accept the fact that he was a leader of a party that doesn’t agree with the church on abortion but had to draw the line when Daschle spoke at NARAL fundraisers and actively campaigned for abortion rights.

I think that’s where many are missing the point here. When these leaders go out and publicly undermine the view of the church on such an important issue, how long should the church sit back and accept it? At what point do the beliefs of the church become something that is just given lip service on Sundays?


"I wonder... are Catholics allowed by the Church laws to serve on a jury for a capital offense? Can a Catholic legislator vote to keep the death penalty in his/her state?"

I have no clue.

[Screaming Lord Byron]

48. This happened in Calgary to Joe Clark, former PM of Canada.

Clark (a local MP) is known for his pro-gay rights and pro-abortion stance. Due to this the local bishop says he will refuse to bury Clark in a Catholic ceremony and will encourage other priests to do the same.

[LeahMira]

65. Yeah... money talks!

Clark (a local MP) is known for his pro-gay rights and pro-abortion stance. Due to this the local bishop says he will refuse to bury Clark in a Catholic ceremony and will encourage other priests to do the same.

Sheesh! And yet they will bury a Mafioso with full honors! I guess that if you remember the Church in your will, you are assumed to have repented in your final seconds of life.

[bleedingheart]

54. Notice the Catholic Church will cash your check without asking

what your positions on issues are.

I am pro-choice, pro-birth control and I have never had a check returned...even after receiving the sacrament...and I notice it doesn't burn when I chew it...so God mustn't be unhappy with me either.

[ugarte]

56. Exactly

See my post #52. Pro-choice does not equal pro-abortion.

[robcon]

84. For the Catholic Church, pro-choice=pro-abortion

I agree the pro-choice is not necessarily pro-abortion in some narrow way, but for Catholic teaching, the difference does not exist.

It is one of the prinicipal tenets of the Catholic Church that murder is wrong and abortion is murder of the unborn, and is therefore wrong.

If a Catholic promoted abortion as a 'choice' there is no moral difference between that and the position that abortion is ok. The Church 'requires' that Catholics be against murder, although it accepts shortfalls and errors. But to stay in good graces, one must repent sins. Being actively pro-choice is a violation of Church teaching.

[mvd]

58. The Catholic Church is too adament that..

their teachings are correct and that a good Catholic must believe exactly how they do. In that way, they are like the fundies. A pro-life stance has always been one of their most important issues, so no surprise here. My school had pro-life clubs but no anti-death penalty clubs.

[Just Me Here]

63. ?????????

"their teachings are correct and that a good Catholic must believe exactly how they do. In that way, they are like the fundies."

Do you understand the difference between a religion and a political party?

[mvd]

129. I do not understand your reply

I was saying that the Catholic Church resists progress or alternative takes on things. Whatever they say is set in stone. Keeping someone from the Sacraments shows intolerance.

[Just Me Here]

135. Like I said.

"Whatever they say is set in stone."

No, it's written in the Bible which doesn't change based on political opinion. That's the difference between the politics and Christianity.

If you want a religion where it's okay to believe whatever you want regardless of what the church teaches, Christianity isn't the religion for you.

[Yupster]

133. Couldn't get more fundie

than the Catholic church. They trace their organization right back to St. James and St. Paul.

[demosincebirth]

59. good point!

I think you made the best argument on this issue than can be made. Thanks for your insight.

[LuLu550]

74. This topic came up last week on Crossfire

by Bob "The mouthpiece of Rove" Novak. This is not coming from the Catholic Church, but the right wing nuts who are trying to whip up an anti-Kerry frenzy among Catholics.

[SharonAnn]

75. If it's from Bob Novak, then it's from Father McCloskey, the Opus

Dei priest who converted him (and others).

McCloskey thinks that Catholics who have any disagreements with him should leave the Church. He says they're called "protestants".

He thinks that it would be about 80% who leave and that the Church would be better off for it.

As a Catholic, I think that he and the 20% should leave the Church since their addiction to their right-wing views means that they can't follow Christ's teachings.

[TimMooring]

82. Respect for the Catholic Church

I wish i could. The best I can say is that they have beautiful ceremonies and can form a good parade. The church's policies are nearly demonic. I don't see that they're in a position to participate in discussions about modern morality. At least not as an organized religion.

[Just Me Here]

88. Why call himself Catholic?

If John Kerry disagrees with the Catholic Church on such an issue that is life and death if you're Pro-Life or an important human rights issue if you're Pro-Choice, why does he continue to call himself Catholic?

Why should the Catholic Church ignore the actions of one of it's members just because they are running for President?

It is the CHOICE of John Kerry to go to church each Sunday. If he doesn't want the judgement of the Catholic Church, all he has to do is declare that he is no longer a Catholic.

Why doesn't he do that?

[cap]

102. the catholic church is not the "pro-life" church

there is a lot more to Catholicism than being pro-life. Frankly it wasn't such a large portion of Catholicism for centuries. It really didn't enter the public debate until the 1800's.

If the Church wants to kick out pro-choice Catholics, well, there goes a lot of contributions in the offering basket. This is coming at a time when the Church needs money.

As far as going back and receiving communion after voting pro-choice, I see nothing wrong with that. It's not a sin to vote pro-choice. At any rate, we, Catholics, are known for backsliding. :) I have my own little list of sins that I keep confessing regularly!!! I think a few pedophile priests did some backsliding themselves, too!!!

If the Church wants to consistently endorse Republican pro-life candidates, and punish Democrat pro-choice candidates, then I want them to pay taxes.

[Just Me Here]

105. Punish?

"If the Church wants to consistently endorse Republican pro-life candidates, and punish Democrat pro-choice candidates, then I want them to pay taxes."

They are a religious organization that has a doctrine. How is expecting their members to not actively campaign against that doctrine punishing their members?

They aren't telling their members how to vote the are telling their members that they will not put up with somebody actively, openly, and proudly undermining the doctrine of the Church.

Kerry CHOOSES to attend.

[cap]

106. easy, call the IRS...

if a church, any Church (not just the Catholics), start engaging in political activity then they can have their tax exempt status.

I think the Church should forgive and forget.

[Just Me Here]

110. It's within the church

"if a church, any Church (not just the Catholics), start engaging in political activity then they can have their tax exempt status."

They aren't engaging in political activity. They are deciding what they do WITHIN THE CHURCH. They are telling somebody who CHOOSES to attend THEIR CHURCH what THEY will and will not accept.

If a presidential candidate who believed that George Bush is God decided to attend the Catholic Church, would it be political if they decided to tell him they don't accept it?

You can forgive and forget but you can't afford to ingore.

[cap]

109. this smacks of Karl Rove's dirty tricksq

and will do no good for the Catholic church by dividing it.

Much of the very liberal NorthEast is Catholic! Catholic liberals are plentiful up in Kerry's area of the country.

There are a lot of pro-choice Catholics like me who are going to stop putting money in the Church's offering plate if it comes down to it. Historically, when the Church has meddled in politics it has not fared well.

My family has been Catholic since time immemorial. Sometimes I wonder why I stay in the Church when it acts this way... but I believe in change from within. We got over the Inquisition, we'll get over this too.

[Just Me Here]

111. Meddling in Politics?

"Historically, when the Church has meddled in politics it has not fared well."

Why should the Catholic Church look the other way while Kerry openly supports abortion rights just because he is a presidental candidate?

If Kerry doesn't want the Catholic Churches approval, he doesn't have to attend. HE IS THE ONE WHO CHOOSES TO ATTEND.

[cap]

138. the church can not get away with implicitly endorsing GW

by denying Kerry Communion or pushing him out of the church.

Sorry it won't wash. If the church insists on doing this it should lose its tax free status.

As for people leaving the church because of disagreements with the hierarchy, that won't wash either. Church history is full of people who disagreed with the hierarchy...some of them became canonized much later on. We have granted sainthood to some of our dissenters!!! Not that I think that Kerry is in line for sainthood!

[Just Me Here]

140. SEPARATION of Church and State

Kerry ASKS THE CHURCH for communion, the Church has the right to determine whether THE CHURCH should give it to him. Recieving communion in not a right and it is not a political statement. Are we going to start punishing churches for simply deciding what qualifications a person has to meet in order to take part in a RELIGIOUS CEREMONY in a RELIGIOUS BUILDING on RELIGIOUS GROUNDS?

That's funny because I always thought the separation of church and state protected BOTH the church and the government from interference by the other. Of course, if you want to trample the constitution, go ahead, you’ll fit right in with the current administration.

"Church history is full of people who disagreed with the hierarchy...some of them became canonized much later on. "

That’s just a just plain weak argument. You are saying that anybody who disagrees with the Church is somehow better because in the past there have been a few people who disagreed with the Catholic Church and were later canonized?

[cap]

151. some of these few have been major theologians

like St. Thomas Aquinas!

[Just Me Here]

141. If Kerry went to a Mosque...

...and they told him that he is not welcome to take part in the prayers to Allah because he is openly a Christian and does not believe in Islamic teachings, would you want to take away their religious status?

If a Jewish synagogue told him that he could not become a Jew because he believes Jesus Christ is the Son of God (which if he doesn’t, it’s pretty idiotic to ask for communion any way) would you say that Jewish organizations need to lose their tax-free status?

Would that be an implicit endorsement of Bush as you are saying the Catholic Church is doing?

What's the difference between that and the Catholic Church deciding who they give communion to?

[IronLionZion]

112. This is such a non-issue

This is the Rove machine at work people. If this is the best they can do, then lets beat them hard in November.

I'm Catholic and strongly against witholding sacraments from Catholic politicians because we have a separation of church and state in the US that must be respected. Many Catholics like myself are personally pro-life but feel that others deserve the freedom to choose.

Frankly, abortion is not a big issue for me. I am more angry about the death penalty. There is blatant hypocrisy at work here because the ones who condemn pro-choice politicians almost never condemn the pro-death penalty politicians. damn flip-flopping Republicans!

[Nobody]

144. Judging from my Catholic family's reaction to Bush

This is not going to matter one bit. Most are Democrats and have no intention of voting for Bush. Without even intending to discuss politics, I discovered that many are fed up with the Republicans lying to the 9-11 commission, and several agreed with me about how hosed the economy is.

My dad is a Republican and will probably vote for Bush, but he is also a pro-choice Catholic and has taken on the anti-abortion protestors harassing any young woman they see going into his doctor's office.

[hyphenate]

145. As a lapsed Catholic

This is what I have to say:

Politics is not religion. Religion should not be politics. Catholics through the centuries have always been more compassionate than many OTHER so-called Christians, by administering to the sick, the weak, the starving and others who needed help. On the one hand, if Catholics and all Christians stuck to such duties and kept their freaking hand out of politics, this world would be a far better place. It's only when religion infiltrates politics that there is an unseemly aura of grandiosity and hubris attached to their deeds and their motives.

Through the past two millennia, and even to the beginning of recorded history itself, people have confused and obfuscated the lines between human compassion and moral standards and their religious tenets, to the point that "compassion" "empathy" "goodwill" and other such tendencies are considered the haven of only those with religious motivation. It's not right, and it's only getting the world into more trouble to confuse what are basic traits of sane, feeling people with the agenda of those who advertise their religious duties above all else.

Keeping the rule of government out of the hands of these tendentious phonies is paramount to keeping the thin line between church and state separate, and trying to keep the U.S. a secular, non-judgemental country.

[Just Me Here]

148. ???

How is the Church deciding who they will and will not grant a religious ceremony to in a religious building 'reaching into politics'?

Should the Catholic Church compromise its doctrine just because one its members is running for President?

[hyphenate]

149. In my own recollection

of the church, anonymity of the "sinner" was always paramount. The priest would take a confession, decide what was a good penance, dole it out, and then the "sins" of the confessor were forgiven by God's human representative on earth--i.e., the priest.

Why should it be different for a public figure, someone whose every movement is watched and criticized in one fashion or another? Within the confines of the church itself, John Kerry would--and could--never be singled out for his policies--right or wrong--within his daily life. So why should the church take umbrage at what he does as a politician? Why should they take a particular notion into their collective head and deny him the sacraments? Once he's confessed and been given penance, he deserves the same exact treatment as any other member of a congregation.

By following too closely to his "politics" which make him beholden to his own conscience and the will of his constituents, the church is, indeed, intruding into the world of politics. If they were taking care of their own internal affairs, and not passing judgement like they are with Kerry, the church would never even be a factor in this case.

Throughout history, people have done horrendous things in the name of their religion. John Kerry has yet to do 99.9999% of anything evil, but it's part of his job to listen to the people who voted for him. If that makes him a bad human, he's no worse than the internal engine that runs the Catholic church and has kept the pedophilia of its priests and other religious leaders secret since time immemorial.

[Just Me Here]

150. Not quite.

"Why should they take a particular notion into their collective head and deny him the sacraments?"

Are you refering to the reason abortion is considered murder within the Catholic Church? If so, it's not hard to understand where the direction comes from, the Bible.

"Once he's confessed and been given penance, he deserves the same exact treatment as any other member of a congregation."

This is a pretty far from the truth. All you have to do is watch and episode of the Sopranos to see an example of the Church not granting penance when you openly admit that once you leave the building, you're going to go back to what you were asking forgiveness for.

A mere confession that you are doing wrong is not what is asked. A sincere repentance of the actions is necessary. In other words, just stopping by confession on the way home for every NARAL fundraiser isn’t enough.

The leader of Catholics for Choice was excommunicated which is FAR worse than what is going on with Kerry. This isn't the first time the Church has stated that it will not tolerate it's members actively campaigning for abortion rights and therefore directly undermining the well stated doctrine of the Church.

I can't think of to many organizations that would put up with its members going out and actively campaigning against what it stands for and supporting causes that fly in the face of the organization. Why is the Catholic Church expected to do so in this case?

"By following too closely to his "politics" which make him beholden to his own conscience and the will of his constituents, the church is, indeed, intruding into the world of politics. If they were taking care of their own internal affairs, and not passing judgement like they are with Kerry, the church would never even be a factor in this case."

Another poster put it much better than I can but Kerry CHOOSES to attend the Catholic Church, they don't force him to. He can choose to be beholden to his what he thinks his constituents want or he can choose to be beholden to what the Church teaches. It's his choice but he can't expect to have his cake and eat it to.

They aren't telling him how to vote, they are telling him that if he continues to support abortion rights and campaign in support of laws that permit what the church views as murder, they will not grant him RELIGIOUS SERVICES in RELIGIOUS BUILDINGS.

All he has to do if he doesn't like the requirements of the Church is leave the Church. But wait, that's what the Chuch is saying.

No insult, but the claim that a religious organization shouldn't pass judgement on its members actions is actually pretty silly.

Again, why is the Church obligated to compromise its own doctrine because one of its members is running for president?

[cap]

152. btw... what contraceptive method are you using?

I am assuming that you are either abstinent or (if married)are using the rhythm method (hope you're not committing adultery on a regular basis and going to confession repeatedly asking for forgiveness)? You are also one of the few people in the Catholic church (I am assuming that you are Catholic since you are vociferously defending the right of the Church ) that are doing it. So how does abstinence feel? How does not getting laid on a day when you feel pretty darn horny? Do you offer your sufferings up to the Virgin Mary as penitence for your sins and pray for relief? If you can hack it, well, more power to you. But that sure aint the way the rest of us live our lives. If you are, in fact, using contraception (which is, also, contrary to the Church's teachings), you are a big hypocrite

I use modern contraception! Like most of us in the pews! Remember when most of us Catholics (and I am assuming that you are Catholic) didn't and there were 10 kids in Catholic families???? Look in your pews, most of the families are 2-3 kid families. They aren't using the rhythm method.

In fact, in the Philly area I couldn't find the rhythm method class. There is a class offered by the church that spans a couple nights a week or is a one day class offered on the weekend as part of the pre-Cana package. I was considering getting married outside the Philly archdiocese and the other diocese wanted a certificate that you received the full training in the rhythm method, not just the 1 1/2 hour intro class in pre-Cana. Nobody could give me a phone number for a coordinator for the class. Called all over the Philly area. No church was doing it for real. In fact, when I asked my pre-Cana coordinator if I could get a certificate for the portion covered in pre-Cana, she said it wasnt the right class, that it was just an introduction. She said she didn't know what kind of contraception we were planning to use, but the intro in pre-Cana was definitely not enough to go out and use the rhythm method. If you could have heard the tone in her voice, she sounded like I was a barbarian for thinking of using the rhythm method -- it was a definite, what planet are you on, kind of tone of voice.

If you think we are all hepped on pro-life, you should have been in my pre-Cana class the afternoon we had our intro to rhythm method discusssion. Boy, it was a quiet group with a lot of glum faces. When we took our break, I went to the ladies room and we were all complaining over the absurdity of waking up and taking your temperature every morning and charting it. People resented even sitting through 1 1/2 hours of the rhythm method. Their parents never had to go through this class and they didn't see any reason that they had to.

This is not a new thing. My mother used contraception. She had her first three kids within 1- 1 1/2 years of each other. Then she and Dad realized that they couldn't just keep cranking out babies year after year and the rhythm method was not an option.

Mom grew up in foster care during the Great Depression in a very abusive situation. She was very pro-choice as a result of that experience.

In the 60s and 70s we never heard so much about the pro-life issue. It is not central to Catholic doctrine. There just was one lesson during the whole year on sexuality. We heard about the Trinity, the Saints, Christs message of peace, the Virgin Mary, the Ten Commandments, etc. I went to CCD until I was 14. Never heard too much about pro-life. If it were a key doctrine the Church would have covered it in great detail.

Yes, I am a contributor to Planned Parenthood. I worked as a temp for them during my college years. There are lots of Catholics who work for Planned Parenthood and even more who contribute. As Clinton said it: Abortion should be Safe, legal and rare.

By the way, how much of this pro-life message are you really propagating? If a baby is dying in a woman, are we women supposed to risk our lives in order to have this child. Surgeons just don't have the time to attempt a Cesarean (never mind a Cesarean poses its own set of risks). Let's have this debate in public. The Church pro-life position does not permit an abortion in this case. I'd like to see a pro-life politician tell the American public, both Catholic and non-Catholic, that a woman must sacrifice her life for her child. Go ahead. When contraception fails, and they all do, even the rhythm method, a woman must make the decision whether she is to carry that unplanned pregnancy to term. If her health isn't up for this, I'd like to see a pro-life politician, tell her that she can't terminate her pregnancy. I'd like to see the Church tell women that they can't terminate pregnancy in cases of health. When you look at statistical failure rates of a few percent in a population of 200+ million, that's a lot of people who end up in preganancies they don't want to be in.


As for the Church penalizing political leaders, where do they get off?
The grounds for asking Kerry not to receive Communion is that being pro-choice, he is an accomplice to murder. Well, the Church is noticeably silent on mass murderers. They gave communion and all the sacraments to Marcos, Pinochet, Franco, and the rest of the scummy dictators and death squads in Latin America. The priests sure knew what these stellar representatives of Catholicism were doing. They never asked them to leave.

Go ahead. Make my day and kick us all out of the Church. They dont dare. The Church would go bankrupt. Half of us Catholics don't believe in pro-life. There are just too many of us. I am seriously considering witholding my contribution to the Sunday basket and instead giving to a Catholic charity instead because of Church meddling in politics. If they did this nonsense in Philly, I definitely won't contribute.

BTW, your reference to the Soprano episode of a priest not giving anyone abstinence is a joke. That just happens on TV. Never happened in any parish I've ever been in. Never knew anybody who walked out of confession saying they never received abstinence -- despite all our backsliding :). Doesn't happen in the prison ministeries either.

Leave the church. Not an option. My family has been Catholic since time immemorial. The Church has been foolish and even criminal before but we have endured because the faith is gentle and tolerant. I never went for the harsh, condemnatory, rigid faith so I've had a better experience than many. At its best, the church serves as a moral beacon guiding us towards becoming better people. That's where the Church should stay. If it continues, we pro-choice Catholics won't leave the church, but we won't contribute.

[rpannier]

153. My Question for Years

I want to know why abortion is the line the Church has drawn. The Catholic Church has issued hundreds of condemnations against the death penalty and other social/political ills, but for some reason they don't feel the need to punish the politicians that support these positions that run counter to Church teaching. But, lets not forget, it's only a group of grandstanding Republican supporting bishops that have taken this act. But, with news services like faux, the right will , of course, try to use it as a wedge issue.

[cap]

155. the hierarchy is hoping for a payoff in the faith-based

initiatives. Catholic Charities got $300 million this year. That's why these bishops are attacking Kerry. The bishops are selling out the poor in their parishes.

This pro-life nonsense is heavily coordinated. Before the bishops started attacking Kerry, the pro-lifers had a score card giving GW high ratings floating in my Catholic church. Its all political.

I say take away the tax exempt status. Hit em where it hurts.