Recently in Politics Category

President-elect Obama has put his pro-abortion agenda into overdrive. I've now seen several articles where he lays out initial plans and they typically include two things:

• Renewing the requirement that nations who receive American funds must have legalized abortion (President Bush had stopped this policy)
  
• Removing President Bush's ban on government funds for embryonic stem cell research
  

And remember his big promise: to pass the Freedom of Choice Act, which will remove most state obstacles to abortion.
 
So I was happy to see today that American Catholic bishops are vowing to fight Obama on his pro-death agenda:

The nation's Roman Catholic bishops vowed Tuesday to forcefully confront the Obama administration over its support for abortion rights, saying the church and religious freedom could be under attack in the new presidential administration.

It is heartening to see the Bishops stand up for life like this. Unfortunately it seems a little late, but the article does note that they spoke out more forcefully on abortion than they have in the past. The Bishops were also clear on one of the key problems:

In an impassioned discussion on Catholics in public life, several bishops said they would accept no compromise on abortion policy. Many condemned Catholics who had argued it was morally acceptable to back President-elect Obama because he pledged to reduce abortion rates.

Let us pray that the Bishops can unify behind a pro-life agenda and get the Democratic party to back off on the pro-death agenda! Hopefully this marks a turning point in the relationship between the Catholic Bishops and the Democratic Party, which hasn't been a friend to Catholics in a long time. And as Catholics, let's get behind this initiative of our Bishops and hope that other pro-life Christians join in!

God bless,
Jay

Still undecided between Obama and McCain? A new website has a great concept that can help you choose. Basically, you "adopt" a child that was aborted but would be able to vote today. Then you cast your vote on their behalf. Go see the details at OneBabyOneVote.com. Or start by adopting a child here.

The site as a whole is pretty good. They do a great job of explaining the abortion positions of the two candidates and answering common objections (see here). It's a wealth of knowledge that explains pretty clearly where the candidates stand. So if you're undecided, adopt a child and vote for them.

God bless,
Jay

Bella is a phenomenal movie that I recommend you see. It's a powerful movie on the nature of life. And the man behind it was Eduardo Verastegui. Now the famous Mexican actor has something else to say, and it's no less powerful.

This is a video that is a must-see in America today. However, one warning: it is graphic at times. Do NOT watch this with children in the room. Tonight, you will likely find yourself crying as you lay in bed. Unfortunately, this horror is a reality across America:

May God save us all. This happens thousands of times a day in America.

You can see more at his website: ObamaMustSee.com

 

God bless,

Jay

What are the key issues in deciding who should be the next president? Promises are great, but what really matter is the character and moral strength of the person who we vote for. Anyone can promise tax breaks, new programs, etc, but as a Christian, I believe we need someone who has the moral character to choose what is right, even if it isn't popular. Here's a list of the moral issues in the next presidential election.

Issue	John McCain	Barack Obama
Abortion	Pro-life. Believes life begins at conception and should be protected.	Pro-abortion. 100% pro-abortion record in voting; even worked to block a bill that required doctors to provide medical care to babies born during a botched abortion.
Supreme Court Judges	Committed to adding strict constitutionalists to the Supreme Court who are pro-life	Committed to protect abortion rights in choosing Supreme Court justices
Euthanasia	Against Euthanasia.	Approves of Euthanasia
Gay Marriage	Against gay marriage or civil unions that are equivalent to gay marriage	Against gay marriage, but for civil unions that are "indistinguishable" from a heterosexual marriage
Death Penalty	Supports the Death Penalty	Supports the Death Penalty
Torture	Against torture of terrorists, others	Against torture of terrorists, others

Any other issues I should add? Who wins on the moral front? Certainly not the Democratic Candidate.

God bless,
Jay

What's at stake this election? Senator Obama is clear:

With one more vacancy on the Supreme Court, we could be looking at a majority hostile to a women's fundamental right to choose for the first time since Roe v. Wade. The next president may be asked to nominate that Supreme Court justice. That is what is at stake in this election.

That's from his statement on the 35th Anniversary of Roe vs. Wade. But he even went further: he vowed to pass the Freedom of Choice Act. If you aren't aware of the Freedom of Choice Act, now is the time to become familiar. You can read the full text here.

Basically the Freedom of Choice Act would, on a federal level, invalidate any laws (even state laws) that limit abortion in any way. It's a despicable way of preventing voters from standing in the way of abortion. And how does Senator Obama put it?

The first thing I'd do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act. That's the first thing that I'd do.
-- Senator Barack Obama, speaking to the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, July 17, 2007

Don't mislead yourself: Senator Obama worships at the altar of abortion. Remember, he blocked a bill that would have required doctors to provide medical attention to babies accidentally born after a botched abortion. This isn't your average abortion candidate, he's a serious supporter and brags (in the link above even) about his 100% perfect rating from the abortion lobby.

Vote pro-life. Vote McCain.

God bless,
Jay

What happens to babies who are born during a botched abortion? Right now they are required to receive medical attention from doctors and nurses once they are born. But that will end if Senator Obama has anything to say about it:

A new website called BornAliveTruth.org is trying to bring the reality of Obama's message home. And one abortion survivor, Gianna Jessen, is challenging Senator Obama to change his position:

I find it appropriate that she has the same first name as Saint Gianna Molla for obvious reasons. Be sure to check out BornAliveTruth.org for more information.

Thanks to Catholic Fire for bringing this to my attention!

God bless,
Jay

PS - How can you vote for Obama in good conscience?? He has said before that the issue of abortion is the biggest issue of this election. But his goal is pass a constitutional amendment to prevent it from ever being overturned. A Vote for McCain/Palin is a Vote for Life.

This week - probably because of everything going on in the world - is a more serious collection of posts that I remember seeing recently. And it makes for compelling reading that really challenges you to think through your preconceptions and understand Catholic teaching. That's not to say there aren't a few lighter posts, but this Carnival is a little heavier than most! Enjoy:

Father Aloysius starts us off with Fundamental Truth at Life's Crosses. This post explores our reasons for being and why we reject the overtures from God so often.

Next we move to Mini Confessions at Quantum Theology where we hear the outcome of sending a 14-year-old to a face-to-face confession rather than a penance service.

Never forget that God Alone is Enough as explained on Thoughts on Grace. When you are filled with fear, remember St. Theresa's poem and know that God alone is enough.

Steven highly recommends him, so he reviewed J.F. Powers Bibliography at Book Reviews and More. Powers is an excellent Catholic short story writer that you should know more about. This is a good place to start!

Poetry speaks and convicts in Like Dinner on Wood at Long Skirts. It is a poem about how Catholics before us were willing to be served up Like Dinner on Wood to preserve the Faith.

Okay, I admit it at Homeschool Goodies takes us in a different direction: She admits being a "dance mom" and explains the benefits her homeschooled children receive from dance.

Keeping on that theme, Homeschooling: A Growing Trend at A Catholic Mom Climbing the Pillars explores the question of why people are homeschooling and paints a great picture of the homeschooling family.

Sarah makes grape jelly in The Color Purple at Just Another Day of Catholic Pondering. She also reflects on opportunities for prayer during her work. Wow - sounds delicious . . .

A Reflection . . . at Organ-ic Chemist ponders a homily on the reading from September 14 where the image of a snake is raised to save those who were bitten. What caught her attention was the pastor's reference to a snake being an ambivalent symbol.

Another reflection on the same readings: God's Punishment and Salvation at HMS Blog. As always, HMS Blog is definitely worth your time. It also focuses on the image of a snake prefiguring Christ.

Moving to politics, Over the Edge? at A Catholic View points out that Bishop Niederauer wants to speak with Nancy Pelosi about her recent misstatements on Catholic positions. Can we expect anything to come from this? Interesting comic included.

In a moving post, an Abortion Survivor Pleads with Obama in New Ad at Catholic Fire. Gianna Jessen survived when her mother's abortion was botched. She asks Senator Obama why he would vote against a bill requiring doctors to provide medical attention to babies born during botched abortions. It's a powerful ad.

Staying in politics, The Change We Need at Living Catholicism takes a closer look at Senator Obama's stance on abortion and how it matches up against Catholic teaching. Includes the USCCB's points from Faithful Citizenship.

Don't miss the Worldwide Rosary for Unborn Babies reported on at A Life of Benevolence. The event happens on October 18th and you can find the details in this post.

Serious issues continue with Suicide and Salvation at Aggie Catholics. Is it a sin to think about killing yourself? How about to try to kill yourself? This post explains Catholic teaching.

Notes from a Subculturist at The Catholic Journeyman explains what a subculturalist is and how they find balance, beauty, and battlescars in Catholic apologetics.

We finish up with Parable of the Laborers in the Vineyard at Prepare for Mass offers a series of videos exploring the readings - it's a great way to get prepared for Mass!

God bless,
Jay

I recently read a TIME magazine article that praised President Bush's efforts in Africa. It was so refreshing to read something objective and honest about the president from mainstream media. Bush is truly doing some great pro-life work on that continent, but he's getting little press about it. His policy towards Africa, which is outlined in more detail at www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/africa/, has been successful in helping that suffering continent with democracy, poverty, and saving lives.

It is sad that I've met many people who have such a hatred for Bush despite some of the great work he has done. I understand disagreeing with some of his policies, especially his policy on Iraq. But from what I've observed he seems to be a man of faith who tries to do what is best with the information he has. I judge this on what he has done for the abortion battle, embryonic stem cell research, Africa, and immigration. Even on Iraq I believe his main intent was to protect U.S. citizens from the destructive forces of Al-Qaeda. Surely he didn't go to war just so he could become unpopular.

So this article is to help give Bush credit where credit is due. I hope and pray the next president will continue Bush's pro-life successes.

Have a fruitful Lent,
Daniel

Personally, I feel that social issues are the key to a good presidential candidate. If they can stand firm to the values I agree with, I believe we’ll get through most things. But if they simply ride the tide of populism, they can be manipulated (and the minority is sure to take the brunt of the attacks). If they disagree with me on key issues, I simply can’t vote for them. Period.

I think it’s worth noting a comment just made on our site by Ed:

Even if he does not have a chance according to the wisdom of man. My vote will count as a vote for God. Some may say if you vote like that you will be wasting your vote and maybe even hurt your party's chance to win. I thought of that. It would make sense if I were only concerned with the here and now. But I am not. I have an eternal perspective that allows me to look past this life. At best, man will live an average 70 years then the only thing that will really matter is Gods plan. Why not support what God supports now?

Insightful words that I would argue are exactly the point of our election system. Vote for the best man, not the best man who is likely to be elected.

I’ve already gone in detail on the Presidential Candidates and Abortion here. So this will deal with the other social issues, which (I have to say it) all take a back seat to the right to life (it’s difficult to be upset about health care if you never had a chance to be born). I’m also only looking at candidates that are at or near the top (despite my point above) or at least leading for their cause. Here they are:

DEMOCRATS
Barak Obama.

• Immigration. Supports border fence and a path to legalization for illegal immigrants. Wants to add penalties to businesses who hire illegal aliens.
  
• Health Care. Require health care for children. Subsidized by businesses and rolling back Bush tax cuts for those earning over $250k. Focused on driving down costs – interested in pushing insurance and drug companies.
  
• Euthanasia. Everywhere I read pegs Obama as pro-Euthanasia, but I can’t find a direct quote proving this.
  
• Gay marriage. Opposes gay marriage but supports civil unions. Claims homosexuality is equivalent to heterosexuality.
  

Hilary Clinton.

• Immigration. Supports border fence and a path to legalization for illegal immigrants. Tougher penalties for businesses hiring illegals.
  
• Health Care. Require all to have health care paid for by businesses and rolling back Bush tax cuts for those earning over $250k.
  
• Euthanasia. Believes euthanasia should be allowed.
  
• Gay marriage. Opposes gay marriage but supports civil unions as long as the unions have a “full equality of benefits” with marriage.
  

REPUBLICANS
Mike Huckabee.

• Immigration. Build border fence. Illegals must leave and apply for citizenship. Tougher penalties for businesses hiring illegal aliens.
  
• Health Care. For free market system. Use tax credits and cost control to lower cost of insurance.
  
• Euthanasia. Opposes euthanasia.
  
• Gay marriage. Opposed to gay marriage and civil unions.
  

Mitt Romney.

• Immigration. Build border fence. No path for illegal immigrants. Tougher penalties for businesses.
  
• Health Care. For free market system. Allow states to develop cost control methods.
  
• Euthanasia. Not opposed to euthanasia – said Terri Schiavo’s death should not have been stopped.
  
• Gay marriage. Opposed to gay marriage and civil unions.
  

John McCain.

• Immigration. Build border fence. Supports path to legalization for illegal aliens (includes fines).
  
• Health Care. For free market system. Pledges universal health care without tax increases or a mandate.
  
• Euthanasia. Opposes euthanasia.
  
• Gay marriage. Opposed to gay marriage and civil unions.
  

I didn’t include Iraq because it’s not technically a social issue. However, it’s pretty easy to separate them into three groups:

• Republicans: against a timetable, but for a “responsible withdrawal”
  
• Hilary Clinton: no hard timetable, but phased withdrawal by 2013
  
• Barak Obama: phased withdrawal with all troops out in 16 months.
  

Any other issues I should go back and add? I also didn’t include Ron Paul, but he’s very traditionally conservative on the social issues.

So, go vote tomorrow. And VOTE PRO-LIFE!

God bless,
Jay

The more I learn about Barak Obama's voting record on life, the more stunned I am. How has this man stayed in politics? I'm really asking. Take a look at this video - would Jesus Christ vote for Barak Obama?

Does anything else need to be said? I wish this was an exaggeration, but it is not. And I hope Christians pay attention and do NOT vote for Barak Obama. Also check out Obamanation.com, which includes one page on Abortion and the Black Community in particular. Abortion is a holocaust, particularly for African-americans (by design - go research Margaret Sanger). Vote pro-life in the next election.

God bless,
Jay

My plan is to add a series of posts on the 2008 Presidential candidates that explores their stands on social issues that are important to Christians. I’ll start with what I believe is the most important social issue: abortion.

There’s a lot of screaming and yelling – particularly from liberal-leaning Christians – when the issue of abortion comes up in political contexts. “It’s not the only issue” or “we can’t be one-issue voters” is often cited as a reason to simply ignore (or at least overshadow) where a particular candidate stands on abortion. However, I think this is a critical mistake. More than being a single issue, where a candidate stands on abortion shows a lot about his/her character and where their priorities lie. If a candidate isn’t willing to protect the most vulnerable of America’s citizens will he protect anyone else?

To illustrate, I’ll use Barak Obama. Senator Obama actually voted no on a bill that would require health care professionals to provide medical attention to babies born during a botched abortion. In other words, if a child miraculously survives an abortion, doctors (according to Senator Obama) should simply watch as the child dies. How can we trust a man like this to protect any right that isn’t politically expedient? And how will he vote on other moral issues with a clear right and wrong?

So yes, other issues are important. But there is no issue that is more illuminating about a presidential candidate than his stance on a pure moral issue that popular opinion would suggest only affects those who can’t vote. So don’t understate the importance of abortion just because you agree with a candidate on some other issue. This is especially important in 2008, because the next president will likely be able to choose at least one Supreme Court Justice.

And, before you comment, I know that you can’t legislate a pro-life culture. In other words, judges can’t simply make the US pro-life, but they can limit abortion. By making partial-birth abortion illegal, for example. Making the US pro-life is a matter of changing the culture, something no judge or president can do. But they can positively influence it and sometimes that is enough.

I took the major candidates and found their stances:

DEMOCRATS: Still kneeling before the altar of abortion.

Hillary Clinton: Supports Roe vs. Wade. Opposes ban on partial-birth abortions.

"I have an obligation to my constituents to make sure that I cast my vote for Chief Justice of the United States for someone I am convinced will be steadfast in protecting fundamental women's rights, civil rights, privacy rights, and who will respect the appropriate separation of powers among the three branches."
— Statement on the Nomination of John Roberts to be Chief Justice, September 22, 2005

John Edwards: Supports Roe vs. Wade. Opposes ban on partial-birth abortions.

On the decision to ban partial-birth abortion: "The ban upheld by the Court is an ill-considered and sweeping prohibition that does not even take account for serious threats to the health of individual women. This hard right turn is a stark reminder of why Democrats cannot afford to lose the 2008 election."
— Statement, April 18, 2007

Barak Obama: Supports Roe vs. Wade. Opposes ban on partial-birth abortions. As we noted, Senator Obama actually voted against a bill requiring health care professionals to provide medical attention to babies born alive during a botched abortion.

"I strongly disagree with today's Supreme Court ruling, which dramatically departs from previous precedents safeguarding the health of pregnant women."
— Statement, April 18, 2007

REPUBLICANS: Not much better this year.

Rudi Giuliani: Currently, supports Roe vs. Wade. Supports ban on partial-birth abortion (not a clear history against).

I ultimately do believe in a woman's right of choice, but I think that there are ways in which we can reduce abortions.
— Republican debate, May 15, 2007

Mike Huckabee: Pro-life. Against Roe vs. Wade. Supports ban on partial-birth abortions. Opposes Federal funding of abortion.

I'm pro-life because I believe life begins at conception, and I believe that we should do everything possible to protect that life because it is the centerpiece of what makes us unique as an American people. We value the life of one as if it's the life of all.
— Republican debate, May 15, 2007

John McCain: Has changed his stance recently. Now against Roe vs. Wade and supports ban on partial-birth abortion.

"Today's Supreme Court ruling is a victory for those who cherish the sanctity of life and integrity of the judiciary. The ruling ensures that an unacceptable and unjustifiable practice will not be carried out on our innocent children...as we move forward, it is critically important that our party continues to stand on the side of life."
— Statement, April 18, 2007

Mitt Romney: Has also changed his stance. Currently against Roe vs. Wade and supports ban on partial-birth abortion.

"I've always been personally pro-life, but for me there was a great question about whether or not government should intrude in that decision. And when I ran for office, I said I'd protect the law as it was, which is effectively a pro-choice position. About two years ago when we were studying cloning in our state, I said, look, we have gone too far; it's a brave new world mentality that Roe v. Wade has given us; and I change my mind...I won't apologize to anybody for becoming pro-life."
— Republican debate, May 3, 2007

I think these are the major candidates at this point (please comment if you think someone else should be included). As I add additional posts on this topic (candidates on their social stances), I’ll link to them from the bottom of this post.

Hope you enjoy – and I hope you all really consider the person you vote for in the 2008 presidential election.

God bless,
Jay

Well - as Matthew pointed out in our comments - it has become official: Tony Blair was received into the Catholic Church. In a country where a Catholic still cannot be king, the former prime minister has now converted to the Church that Jesus Christ founded. We've talked about the possibility before, but now it's more than speculation, he is actually Catholic.

I'm curious what others think. I know Tony Blair was not the biggest supporter of life, but perhaps his position will begin changing now. We can only hope and pray, since he still has a powerful voice in England. And our prayers are with him as he begins receiving the Sacraments.

God bless,
Jay

Pat Robertson has made a shocking choice in my mind: he has given his support to pro-abortion candidate Rudy Guiliani. This amazes me because I can't figure out how a preacher like Robertson chooses politics over his faith in such a dramatic fashion. There are several candidates that fit a Christian message much more than Rudy Guiliani who also has issues with divorce, etc.

What is Pat thinking? Any ideas? I can't believe he would mislead people to believe it's okay to support a candidate that doesn't fit in with their faith. And this is a good example of him choosing his politics over the social choices of a candidate. Pathetic - and it should be a good reason to stop supporting Pat Robertson and his ministry.

VOTE PRO-LIFE.

God bless,
Jay

As we move back into a Presidential election cycle, the issue of Abortion in politics is beginning to crop up again. And this year it seems worse than ever. Not only are Democrats bowing to the alter of Abortion, but many of the mainstream Republican candidates are also pro-Abortion. I recently noticed this:

And I agree completely with it. Just speaking about Catholics for a minute: it is ridiculous for a Catholic to even suggest that abortion is a personal matter that the government should not intrude in. Imagine someone saying that about murder or drunk driving! And it violates the core tenants of their faith, which means they are either lying about their support of abortion (not likely, this is politics) or lying about the seriousness of their faith. In the case of Rudi, there's a lot to suggest that he isn't serious about being Catholic.

The core principle here is the right to life. Everyone deserves the opportunity to carve out a life for themselves, to grow a relationship with God, and to kneel down in prayer to Jesus Christ. Any politician that supports the killing of unborn infants is not fit to serve. Period. So use your vote wisely - and go vote in the primaries for a pro-life candidate. It is a first principle above all: VOTE PRO LIFE. We need a banner for that!

By the way, we already have one party in thrall to the abortion lobby - let's make sure we don't end up with two.

God bless,
Jay

I'm hearing more and more positive things about Fred Thompson. He seems to be a viable, serious option for social conservatives (read: pro-lifers) in the next presidential election. And others are reporting on his popularity. So perhaps we have a new breath of fresh air moving in for this election? Let's hope so, the current crop of candidates is embarrassing if you view life as sacred.

God bless,
Jay

I've been hearing this for years, but it seems Tony Blair is closer to coming into the Church. The British Prime minister steps down next week and seems to be planning on coming into the Roman Catholic Church shortly after. His wife and children are all Catholic, but it would be interesting to hear his reasons. It's good to continuously see this stream of people back to the Church founded by Jesus Christ.

God bless,
Jay

Do you know the leading cause of poverty in the United States, according to the president of DePaul University? Last September I was at the National meeting for the St. Vincent de Paul Society where he was the keynote speaker, and his answer struck me: divorce.

Unfortunately, this was a minor side-note in his speech and he went on to say many other things, but my mind kept coming back to this fact. To me, it is obviously true that in this country of immense wealth, moral poverty often (not always) has a link with material poverty. Ironically, when many Catholic institutions talk about decreasing poverty, there is no mention of the moral link. For example, Catholic Charities (with St. Vincent de Paul Society) has set a goal of cutting poverty in half by 2020. The main means in their effort to reach this goal is changing government policy. To my knowledge, there is no mention of the moral poverty link.

The goal is a noble one, but I think a different approach would more successful. What if a huge effort was made to create healthy families? There would be fewer single mothers, and I know for a fact that single mothers are the main type of client that the St. Vincent de Paul Society serves. Children would grow up with more financial security, but more importantly, with more love, values, and emotional support. Many Christians know what most of secular society doesn’t; that the family is under attack and it is wreaking havoc on society. The breakdown of the family is a much greater problem in this country than material need. The huge piles of free bread thrown away every other day at the St. Vincent de Paul Society proves that to me.

If we focused our efforts in this area, not only would we reduce poverty, but we would increase people’s dignity and happiness, even if they fell on hard economic times. This approach would help people holistically, by addressing their spiritual, emotional, and physical needs, not just their physical needs. I’m sure many have seen the movie “American Beauty”. If we succeed in pulling thousands of families out of material poverty, but they are as dysfunctional as the ones in that movie are, have we succeeded in anything?

Sadly, many Catholics who are all about social justice do not see the intricate web of personal sin, corruption, and different kinds of poverty. They tend to put all the blame on what they see as black and white government economic policies. Let us pray for a deeper conversion to Christ in our pursuit of justice.

In Christ,
Daniel

Tomorrow is the big election day and I just wanted to strongly encourage everyone to vote Pro-Life in the elections tomorrow. The horror of abortion results in millions of children being killed every year in our country. No other problem in America can compare to this horror – and nothing comes close to the lives lost through “choice” than abortion.

Please know which of those on your ballot are pro-life and which support abortion. I strongly believe you can quickly ascertain the moral quality of a candidate by their stance on this one issue. By their choice of whether to protect the innocent unborn, you can understand how they will choose to rule in other issues of weak versus strong. This is the central issue of every election until abortion ends in the U.S.

How we view life issues define us as a culture and as a country. Please vote pro-life tomorrow.

God bless,
Jay

In our modern age, the balance between "church and state", "faith and politics", or "Christianity and citizenship" can seem difficult. Whether it be laws that our contrary to the Faith or immoral leaders, we often find ourselves in positions that challenge our faithfulness and witness to Jesus Christ. As a country, we have had multiple scandals involving presidents, senators, and political representatives at all levels of our government system. Laws legalizing abortion and, in some states, assisted suicide have been passed. Healthcare and poverty continue to be a problem. Yet we have also seen many positive things through the work of the State. So what's a Catholic to do? What's the balance? How can we be faithful Catholics and Americans?

I believe that for a clear answer we must turn to the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

The duties of citizens

2238 Those subject to authority should regard those in authority as representatives of God, who has made them stewards of his gifts:43 "Be subject for the Lord's sake to every human institution. . . . Live as free men, yet without using your freedom as a pretext for evil; but live as servants of God."44 Their loyal collaboration includes the right, and at times the duty, to voice their just criticisms of that which seems harmful to the dignity of persons and to the good of the community.

2239 It is the duty of citizens to contribute along with the civil authorities to the good of society in a spirit of truth, justice, solidarity, and freedom. The love and service of one's country follow from the duty of gratitude and belong to the order of charity. Submission to legitimate authorities and service of the common good require citizens to fulfill their roles in the life of the political community.

2240 Submission to authority and co-responsibility for the common good make it morally obligatory to pay taxes, to exercise the right to vote, and to defend one's country:

Pay to all of them their dues, taxes to whom taxes are due, revenue to whom revenue is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due.45

[Christians] reside in their own nations, but as resident aliens. They participate in all things as citizens and endure all things as foreigners. . . . They obey the established laws and their way of life surpasses the laws. . . . So noble is the position to which God has assigned them that they are not allowed to desert it.46

The Apostle exhorts us to offer prayers and thanksgiving for kings and all who exercise authority, "that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, godly and respectful in every way."47

2241 The more prosperous nations are obliged, to the extent they are able, to welcome the foreigner in search of the security and the means of livelihood which he cannot find in his country of origin. Public authorities should see to it that the natural right is respected that places a guest under the protection of those who receive him.

Political authorities, for the sake of the common good for which they are responsible, may make the exercise of the right to immigrate subject to various juridical conditions, especially with regard to the immigrants' duties toward their country of adoption. Immigrants are obliged to respect with gratitude the material and spiritual heritage of the country that receives them, to obey its laws and to assist in carrying civic burdens.

2242 The citizen is obliged in conscience not to follow the directives of civil authorities when they are contrary to the demands of the moral order, to the fundamental rights of persons or the teachings of the Gospel. Refusing obedience to civil authorities, when their demands are contrary to those of an upright conscience, finds its justification in the distinction between serving God and serving the political community. "Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's."48 "We must obey God rather than men":49

When citizens are under the oppression of a public authority which oversteps its competence, they should still not refuse to give or to do what is objectively demanded of them by the common good; but it is legitimate for them to defend their own rights and those of their fellow citizens against the abuse of this authority within the limits of the natural law and the Law of the Gospel.50

2243 Armed resistance to oppression by political authority is not legitimate, unless all the following conditions are met: 1) there is certain, grave, and prolonged violation of fundamental rights; 2) all other means of redress have been exhausted; 3) such resistance will not provoke worse disorders; 4) there is well-founded hope of success; and 5) it is impossible reasonably to foresee any better solution.

The political community and the Church

2244 Every institution is inspired, at least implicitly, by a vision of man and his destiny, from which it derives the point of reference for its judgment, its hierarchy of values, its line of conduct. Most societies have formed their institutions in the recognition of a certain preeminence of man over things. Only the divinely revealed religion has clearly recognized man's origin and destiny in God, the Creator and Redeemer. The Church invites political authorities to measure their judgments and decisions against this inspired truth about God and man:

Societies not recognizing this vision or rejecting it in the name of their independence from God are brought to seek their criteria and goal in themselves or to borrow them from some ideology. Since they do not admit that one can defend an objective criterion of good and evil, they arrogate to themselves an explicit or implicit totalitarian power over man and his destiny, as history shows.51

2245 The Church, because of her commission and competence, is not to be confused in any way with the political community. She is both the sign and the safeguard of the transcendent character of the human person. "The Church respects and encourages the political freedom and responsibility of the citizen."52

2246 It is a part of the Church's mission "to pass moral judgments even in matters related to politics, whenever the fundamental rights of man or the salvation of souls requires it. The means, the only means, she may use are those which are in accord with the Gospel and the welfare of all men according to the diversity of times and circumstances."53

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
43 Cf. Rom 13:1-2.
44 1 Pet 2:13,16.
45 Rom 13:7.
46 Ad Diognetum 5,5 and 10; 6,10:PG 2,1173 and 1176.
47 1 Tim 2:2.
48 Mt 22:21.
49 Acts 5:29.
50 GS 74 § 5.
51 Cf. CA 45; 46.
52 GS 76 § 3.
53 GS 76 § 5.

Although there is much more in terms of the individual Christian's moral responsibilities to the good of society, I will allow this to suffice for now. If you would like to learn more about the relationship between the Church and State please take the time to review the index of the Catechism for the proper sections.

On this great day of celebration let us recall the many blessings we have received as Americans and let us continue to prayer and work for peace in our country and in the world. May we truly be faithful citizens, but, above all, faithful Catholics.

In Christ,
Joe

As we move toward another election season, it all begins again:

After losing the Catholic vote in 2004 because of their extreme position in favor of all abortions, the Democratic National Committee has appointed a "Catholic outreach coordinator" to help the party win back some of it support. Someone will be hired for the post as early as this month.

The Democrats basically appointed someone without power to win back the Catholic vote. They just don't seem to get it; as long as Democrats bow down to the altar of abortion, gay marriage, and stem-cell research, they are not likely to win the Catholic vote. Yes some Catholics are nominal and might vote a different way, but most understand that the horror of abortion is crossing a line. And as the article points out:

From John Kerry and Al Gore to Hillary Clinton and John Edwards, all of the leading contenders back unlimited abortion and most have long voting histories in Congress opposing bills like a ban on partial-birth abortions and supporting using tax money to pay for abortions.

Pro-life Democrats don't have any chance for higher office without changing their position - just look at Al Gore's required switch. Until Democrats aren't tied to abortion, they won't get my vote. And more and more they won't get the Catholic vote. This is no longer the party of Kennedy, this is the party of partial-birth abortion and taxpayer funded abortion. A Catholic outreach coordinator? Are they kidding?

God bless,
Jay

Recently a reader emailed us a question about the Inquisition and how it relates to the Catholic teaching of infallibility. The answer is simple....it doesn't. As we have said many times on this blog, the Catholic teaching of infallibility is defined as follows:

INFALLIBILITY: The gift of the Holy Spirit to the Church whereby the pastors of the Church, the pope and those bishops in union with him, can definitively proclaim a doctrine of faith or morals for the belief of the faithful (para. 891). This gift is related to the inability of the whole body of the faithful to err in matters of faith and morals (para. 92). - taken from the glossary of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2nd Ed., pg. 883

With that said (again), I would like to focus on a topic that we haven't really covered on this blog - the Inquisition.

Many believe that the Inquisition was a direct activity of the Church that involved the torture and execution of any individual who wasn't Catholic during those "dark" Middle Ages. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

I think in order to best understand the Inquisition we must analyze the century in which it occurred. The 16th century was a brutal time for any individual found quilty of any crime, lest of all treason. In "Protestant" England capital punishment took on its most horrific form - individuals would be hung, cut down while still alive, disembowelled, and then cut into four pieces; hence the phrase "hanged, drawn, and quartered. In France, individuals were boiled alive. And as we know from those stories about the Inquisition, Spain was known to burn guilty individuals at the stake. Extreme punishments for various crimes existed in Muslim, African, New World, and Eastern countries as well but our focus needs to be on "Christian" nations for the sake of this discussion. It was also a time of strong religious and national identity. For the most part, countries in Europe were either Catholic or Protestant. We don't find multiple denominations agreeing to live in harmony, even among different Protestant denominations. Yet certain countries, like Spain, had to deal with the presence of the Moors (Muslims) on their native land due to invasion. In most countries, Jews were also present and for the most part distrusted because they were often believed to be power and money hungry. As sad as this is, it was the nature of those cultures during those centuries.

So what brought on the Inquisition?

I think the most important thing that came out of last night's results (other than the pro-life judges we'll get on the bench) was the point that many in Ohio and other states voted for Bush though they were against the War on Terror and felt his economic policies were ineffective.

Why did they do this? Because the Democratic Party has ceded moral values to Republicans - in other words, voters chose moral issues over economic or political issues in a big way. The Democratic Party has to deal with its perception as the pro-abortion, pro-euthansia, pro-embryonic stem cell research, anti-marriage party. There were 11 states with a ballot initiative to define marriage as being between one man and one woman. How many passed? Every one of them. The majority of the population defines themselves as pro-life. These are big issues the Democrats aren't dealing with.

I was very disappointed to see California pass Proposition 71. Basically a state that can barely pay its bills is funding junk science in a way no corporation would ever do. Shame on Arnold, who - by the way - is another pro-abortion Catholic that shouldn't be receiving communion.

Let's hope the Democrats start rethinking their Party ban on pro-lifers. Imagine the percentage of the Catholic vote a pro-life Democrat would get! In the meantime, it's now up to the population to push President Bush in a more pro-life way. He has a stronger Senate and House majority, so hopefully some of those pro-life judges will make it through the nomination process. But in order to succeed, much prayer is needed.

God bless,
Jay

I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. Choose life, then, that you and your descendants may live. - - Deuteronomy 30:19

Ultimately in elections, countries get what they deserve (see the Old Testament). The conscience of a nation pushes us in one direction or another. Pray that God would not only allow you to cast the correct ballot, but that he would also lead others to do otherwise.

And remember that the unborn have no one to protect their lives, unless you choose to take it upon yourself. Choose wisely . . .

God bless,
Jay

Today Kerry gave his big “Faith” speech in an attempt to fool the faithful into voting for him. I’ve been silent on the issue for a couple of weeks now, but if Senator Kerry feels like he’s man enough to bring it up (and make it the topic of a speech), then I guess he’s man enough to take it.

You can read the full speech at my link above, but needless to say it is full of deceptions. First, Kerry starts out about his faith providing strength and then quotes James:

In the Book of James we are taught: "It is not enough, my brother to say you have faith when there are no deeds...Faith without works is dead."

Okay, here’s where I literally choke. When Kerry quotes “Faith without works is dead,” it bothers me a great deal. Why? Because he follows up with this drivel:

My faith, and the faith I have seen in the lives of so many Americans, also teaches me that, "Whatever you do to the least of these, you do unto me." That means we have a moral obligation to one another, to the forgotten, and to those who live in the shadows. This is a moral obligation at the heart of all our great religious traditions. It is also the vision of America: "E Pluribus Unum." The ethical test of a good society is how it treats its most vulnerable members.

Who among us is more vulnerable today than the 8 million Americans who are out of work? Who is more vulnerable than the 45 million Americans without health insurance? Who is more vulnerable than the parents who have to choose between food and medicine for their children? Older Americans - our parents and grandparents - should not have to take bus trips to Canada to afford the medicines they need to live -- and live healthy lives. No mother who gets up and goes to work every day should have to raise her children in poverty. That's why we have to raise the minimum wage, ensure equal pay, and finish the job of welfare reform, so we can honor work and once again grow the middle class instead of growing the number of people in poverty. [Ed. Note: my emphasis]

Hmmm. Let’s see, John. Maybe the unborn? Maybe those who are being killed to fund embryonic stem cell research which has not resulted in anything remotely resembling a cure? Oh, and by the way, that’s over 6 million babies a year, John, not counting the embryonic research murders or the escalation of abortion you're seeking. Whatever you do to the least of these, you do unto me, indeed.

The simple fact that he has the gall to quote that passage of Scripture speaks to his moral blindness and decadence. That passage pushes the intellect to consider the unborn and John Kerry wants to start using Federal funding to kill more of them. Personally opposed? My @$$.

Then, this so-called “Catholic” goes after those Bishops who are actually trying to protect the “least of these”:

I have tried and so much of that effort has been nourished by my faith. I know there are some Bishops who have suggested that as a public official I must cast votes or take public positions - on issues like a woman's right to choose and stem cell research - that carry out the tenets of the Catholic Church. I love my Church; I respect the Bishops; but I respectfully disagree.
My task, as I see it, is not to write every doctrine into law. That is not possible or right in a pluralistic society. But my faith does give me values to live by and apply to the decisions I make.

In other words, I am guided by my personal morals that suggest I should vote for anything that gets me elected. Earlier in the speech he says his “values will guide [him] as President.” What? Except in the case where those affected can’t vote? Kerry sold out his pro-life stance for political power and now he’s feeding it to those who want to believe. Sickening.

He ends with:

May America always have God's blessing even when we’re killing his children at an unbelievable rate. [Ed. Note: I assumed the latter part of the sentence from his earlier remarks

I think most would prefer Kerry just come out in the open and admit that for him faith is merely a political tool. Don’t preach to me on faith, Senator, when you have none. Faith includes standing up for those positions which won’t help you get elected.

By the way, for those who aren’t aware: the Catholic church hardly ever publicly excommunicates members in our day and age. However, members can privately excommunicate themselves through certain acts and I personally believe John Kerry has done just this. Maybe I’ll post more on this later.

God bless,
Jay

PS - Forgive my anger, but the injustice of a man like Kerry drives me nuts.

We've often argued on this blog that the Democratic political party would be shocked at the number of votes they would get by putting forward a pro-life candidate (this is apparently against party "doctrine"). But a new Wall Street Journal article discovered something even more pathetic: abortions are killing Democrats much more than Republicans. This makes some sense; Democrats are more likely to have an abortion (way more likely actually), just as regular church goes are more likely to vote Republican. But take a look at the article.

The article shows that had Abortion been illegal over the last 30 years, Gore would have won the last election. In other words, so many Democratic voters have been killed by abortion that it cost the Democrats an election (and may cost them the next one as well). This is a great example of how abortion has dismantled the Democratic party, which originated as the party for the common man, but now has become the party of Michael Moore and other left-wing, atheistic lunatics.

God bless,
Jay

I’ve heard numerous times that abortion is the only “Catholic” issue John Kerry is wrong about. So, I wanted to create a simple chart that detailed the Catholic issues and each of the two major candidates’ positions on these issues. Ultimately, I’ve started with the most important issue and worked down. To underline the importance of life, I quote The Dignity of Human Procreation and Reproductive Technologies from earlier this year:

Among all the fundamental rights that every human being possesses from the moment of conception, the right to life is certainly the primary right because it is the pre-condition for the existence of all other such rights.

ISSUE	CATHOLIC TEACHING	PRESIDENT BUSH	JOHN KERRY
Abortion	CCC 2270-2275 “the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being”	Believes in restricting abortions, however does support abortion in specific cases (life of mother, incest, rape). Promotes pro-life judges. Passed partial birth abortion ban. link	Personally opposed, but insists:He will defend this right as President. He recently announced he will support only pro-choice judges to the Supreme Court. Kerry also believes that we should promote family planning . . . link
Euthanasia	CCC 2276-2279, 2324 “It is morally unacceptable”	Supports a Federal ban on euthanasia. While Governor, he vetoed bills legalizing euthanasia. link.	Again, personally opposed, but will not stop a law. Says “But there is a distinction between suicide and management [euthanasia]." link
Fetal Stem Cell Research	Stem cells used for fetal research “cannot come from human embryos” and encourages adult stem cell research (which does not kill embryos). link	Banned federal funds from being used on new stem cell lines, but allowed work on current lines to continue. link	Promises “I will end George Bush’s block on stem cell research” Also wants to increase funding in fetal stem cell research. link
Human cloning	“attempts or hypotheses for obtaining a human being without any connection with sexuality through ‘twin fission’, cloning or parthenogenesis are to be considered contrary to the moral law, since they are in opposition to the dignity both of human procreation and of the conjugal union” link	Pushed a bill banning human cloning - against the procedure. link	“And while I oppose reproductive cloning, I will support research in therapies that allow an individual’s own cells to treat or cure that person’s disease.” link
Homosexual “Marriage”	“There are absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way similar or even remotely analogous to God's plan for marriage and family.” link	Bush has called for and visibly backed an amendment protecting marriage and defining it as between one man and one woman. link	Two statements. First: “John Kerry supports same-sex civil unions so that gay couples can benefit from the health benefits, inheritance rights, or Social Security survivor benefits guaranteed for heterosexual couples.” link Second: "It's rights that are important, not the terminology of the state of the particular relationship. If your rights are protected, if you have all the rights afforded to anybody, it's not that important what you call it." link

If you score a green as +1, a yellow as 0, and a red as -1, Bush ends with a 4 and Kerry ends with a -4.

What's really pathetic about this is that Kerry continues to pronounce himself a "faithful Catholic." The word faithful implies (almost demands) obedience, so I'm not sure what Kerry is talking about. Bush is more faithful to the Church on these matters and he's protestant.

In the end, it's clear: it is difficult to justify voting for Kerry. As Evangelium Vitae states:

(73) In the case of an intrinsically unjust law, such as a law permitting abortion or euthanasia, it is therefore never licit to obey it, or to "take part in a propaganda campaign in favor of such a law, or vote for it." (Quote from the Declaration on Procured Abortion)

Perhaps John Kerry should think about Acts 5:29 and reconsider his stances. Until then, he remains opposed to God's Church and God's laws.

God bless,
Jay

Well, I rarely bring up purely political issues, but today I feel somewhat required to. In the past couple of weeks we first began hearing about the prisoner abuse in Iraq and now we have a live video of a beheading. The prisoner abuse is bad – tragic, really – and it gets to me that Americans were behind it. I somewhat understand the frustration these soldiers feel due to the problems they are having in Iraq. From my understanding much of this was done during interrogations and I find it ironic that earlier this year there were discussions on whether to remove prohibitions against torture in interrogations for terrorists. This clearly was torture and I think we now have a solid answer: Americans won’t (and shouldn’t) stand for it.

But now we have a beheading live on tape. As he is being killed, his murderers were shouting, “God is Great.” This makes me wonder: how do you resolve conflict with an enemy that clearly believes they have God’s intentions at heart? This is a clash of civilizations that comes down to one issue: authority. We discuss authority much on this blog, but not so much about Muslims. Ultimately, Muslims live by the Koran, which like the Bible can be misunderstood. Muslims tend to follow local leaders who may or may not teach “extreme” views. Is there a base of truth we can speak to or from? How do you have a discussion with an enemy that believes God Himself wants you dead?

Obviously dialogue must be started towards resolving conflict moving forward. I do think that Muslim governments tend to keep the people ignorant in order to keep them under control. Perhaps the answer begins with a free Iraq that imparts knowledge and critical reasoning skill to its people. Perhaps. I would be very interested in others opinions.

God bless,
Jay

The more I see of John Kerry, the less I feel I can vote for the man. What it boils down to is this: either you believe murder is wrong and life begins at conception or you don't. It is impossible to say that you believe in both of these, but you aren't willing to stop abortion. By making these statements, we see that John Kerry has no objective moral truth, no real backbone. He is merely using religion as a tool to get votes, rather than something he really believes. This is despicable.

In the end, I am reminded of Jesus telling us to be either hot or cold, but not lukewarm. Kerry should either say, "I am not Catholic" or should start acting like a faithful Catholic. Just. Make. A. Choice.

By the way, the Curt Jester bring us this:

As Catholics, rather than simply trying to remove George Bush from office (the reason many people I know want to vote Kerry), we need to make sure we are voting for the right person. At least George Bush has gotten several pro-life initiatives passed. Imagine what Kerry would do.

God bless,
Jay

All the recent debates about outsourcing have made me think about how I should view it as a Catholic Christian. The moral theology course I’m taking at Steubenville has made me think much about it too. After much thought, and in context to our current economic system, I think Catholics in the developed world should embrace it as the best form of charity for people's material needs. After studying in Argentina as it was heading toward economic meltdown and experiencing the 5th world conditions of Nicaragua, I realized that the number one thing people need in developing countries is jobs. Upon further reflection, I find it unjust that I could always escape back to my cocoon in the suburbs of Atlanta, while the people I met there had to stay and face whatever lied ahead.

Losing a job creates hardship for anyone, whether they live in the 1st or 5rd world, but at least people in the developed world have many more resources to deal with unemployment than people in the 3rd world do. Numerous depressing realities exist in the developing world that we can’t imagine, or forget about as soon as we turn off the TV. I’m guilty of this myself. Many people in developing countries want a chance to provide for themselves and their families, but are sometimes forced to accept charitable handouts as a way to survive.

I believe in giving charity to organizations like Catholic Relief Services, who provide emergency relief to impoverished people, among other things. We must give to charity and always try to help the poor, as the Bible instructs us to do. I think it is important, though, to realize that giving handouts is only a short-term solution to the vast material inequalities of these modern times. I admit, it is much easier to send a $20 check to CRS than to lose a job and find a different one that pays less. Then again our Lord makes it clear to us that true charity is often (if not always) the harder path to take in the short-term.

For decades the US has encouraged capitalism and free trade (which I agree with), much to our benefit. Now, the efficiency and benefits of capitalism are finally spreading globally. Once the same rules of capitalistic efficiency are applied to us and give "our" jobs to poorer people in other countries, we cannot cry foul. We must also keep in mind, though, that this is short-term pain for long-term gain. As people’s standard of living increases globally and prices are kept low, they can buy American goods that they couldn’t before, eventually creating new jobs here. Before I am American, I am Roman Catholic. I hope other Catholics on the blog feel the same way. I know it is difficult, but instead of letting nationalistic, and sometimes selfish, feelings influence our opinion on outsourcing, we must put them after our conscience, which should be guided by the moral theology of the Church.