It’s actually a pretty sweet deal being a liberal Democrat Catholic. You can pretty much say anything you like regarding your faith and you’re off the hook. If he’s pro-abortion, he’s not a dissenter, he’s following the primacy of his conscience.
At least that’s how a group of US House Democrat Catholics see it in their new Statement of Principles. They spend a lot of time talking about the Church’s social teachings, which they find it easy to agree with, and only say about abortion that it’s a bad thing, but they’re not going to do anything to stop it. On the rest of the issues they commonly dissent from the Church’s teaching—euthanasia, embryonic research, same-sex legal unions—not a peep.
So now there’s a convenient list of Catholic politicians in apparent violation of Canon 915: “Those who are excommunicated or interdicted after the impostion or declaration of the penalty and others who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to Holy Communion.” The ball is now in the court of their respective bishops. They’re practically daring the bishops to say something. What will the bishops do? Do you even have to ask?
Technorati Tags: bishops, Catholic, dissent, doctrine, politics
If only it were so easy to let your conscience be your guide! The tricky part is having a well-formed conscience. This is just blatant political pandering in the run-up to the Fall elections. They are trying to recapture the Catholic vote they lost last time around. They should open the Catechism of the Catholic Church and read what it says about Conscience.
Not to let facts intrude here but a number of the Democrats on the list are strong pro-lifers including Dale Kildee, Gene Taylor, Mike Michaud, Joe Crowley, Tim Holden, Jim Oberstar, Tim Ryan and Bart Stupak. Jim Langevin usually votes pro-life, though he has (like Orrin Hatch) wobbled on embryonic stem cell research. It may be unfortunate that these folks have signed this statement (particularly since it is likely that it is a one way street, unless we expect Mike Capuano to start defending pro-life Democrats’ primacy of conscience in Mass.), but this is not just a list of the usual, dissenting suspects, though they are all on there.
By throwing in their lot with those who defend their pro-abortion stance with a specious appeal to primacy of conscience, they have shown their pro-life convictions to be fairly shallow. This statement is designed to give electoral cover to pro-abortion Catholics. That’s all.
The major problem I have with the “primacy” argument and the “constitutional” claim is that they overlook that others within their own Party have taken a pro-life position and have done so in respecting both principles.
It seems to me that they just really disagree with the belief that life begins at conception and they need to be honest about it.
I can’t see anyone who really believes that life begins at conception would advocate murder in any form. It is not logical.