Ave Maria president denounces ‘defiance’ of pope by ‘conservative Catholics’

Officials break ground at a 19-story affordable housing project in downtown Boston on Tuesday, Sept. 24, 2024. / Credit: Andy Ryan

CNA Staff, Sep 29, 2024 / 06:00 am (CNA).
The Archdiocese of Boston broke ground last week on a 19-story affordab… […]

Washington D.C., Dec 9, 2019 / 04:20 pm (CNA).- Catholics who say they accept all Church teachings are more likely than other Americans to say they are planning to vote for Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election, according to a new nationwide poll.

The poll, conducted Nov. 15-21 by RealClear Opinion Research in partnership with EWTN News, surveyed 2,055 registered voters; 1,223 of them self-identified as Catholic.

In addition to asking about political viewpoints and priorities, researchers asked respondents about their faith tradition. The poll asked self-identified Catholics whether their faith plays a role in their life, and if they accept all, most, or some of Church teaching.

While it is easy to segregate the responses of self-identified Catholics from other voters, it is more difficult to determine which Catholics might be described as “faithful,” “observant,” or “orthodox.”

Almost 4 in 10 Catholics said they attend Mass at least once a week, and a similar number attend Mass a few times a year. About one-quarter of Catholics attend Mass once a year or less. Seventeen percent of Catholics said they accept all the Church’s teachings, but only 64% of those Catholics said they attend Mass at least weekly. At the same time, many Catholics who said they attend Mass weekly also said they do not accept all doctrinal teachings of the Church.

To understand one segment of the “Catholic vote,” CNA took a close look at answers from Catholics who told researchers they accept the teachings of the Church and try to live their lives according to them.

Fifty-eight percent of Catholics who say they accept all Church teaching also said they are “sure to vote” for Donald Trump in 2020, compared to 34% of all Catholics and 32% of respondents overall who gave the same answer.

Among Catholic voters who accept all of Church teaching, Trump enjoyed a significant lead in a hypothetical matchup against leading Democratic candidates. These voters favored Trump over Joe Biden by 18 percentage points, over Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders by 25 percentage points, and over Pete Buttigieg by 26 percentage points.

Issues of major concern to Catholics who say they accept all Catholic doctrine are religious freedom and immigration.

Sixty percent of all survey respondents say religious freedom is either “a major concern” or “a concern, but not at the top of my mind” in considering presidential candidates for the upcoming general election.

Among Catholics who accept all Church’s teaching, that number is 77%.

Asked about immigration, two-thirds of Catholics who accept all of Church teaching said the issue is “a major concern,” compared to just over half of all respondents who answered similarly. Respondents were not asked to indicate specifics about their policy positions on immigration.

On other issues, Catholics who accept all of Church teaching were less likely to voice concern than other respondents.

The survey found that 35% of Catholics accepting all Church teaching listed the environment as “a major concern,” while 44% of all respondents said the same. Fifty-six percent of Catholics in that category listed climate change as either “a major concern” or “a concern, but not at the top of my mind,” compared to 65% of all respondents.

Catholics who accept all of Church teaching were slightly more likely than other respondents to be seriously concerned about national security, foreign policy, taxes, and China trade policy, while they were slightly less likely to list health care as a major concern.

On the issues of college affordability, income equality, and criminal justice, Catholics who accept all of Church teaching responded similarly to other respondents.

Gun control and late-term abortion were the two biggest issues considered “deal-breakers” by this voting demographic, with a little over half saying a candidate disagreeing with their views on these issues would automatically disqualify that candidate from receiving their support.

Forty-two percent in this demographic considered a candidate’s differing views on religious freedom to be a deal-breaker, and 47% said the same about immigration.

Just 25% of Catholics who accept all of Church teaching said they would automatically disqualify candidates who oppose their views on same-sex marriage, 11 percentage points lower than the overall response to the question.

Thirty-one percent of Catholics who accept all of Church teaching said a candidate opposing their views on the death penalty would be a deal-breaker for them, compared to just 16% of overall survey respondents.

The poll’s entire data set can be downloaded here.

[…]

Denver, Colo., Oct 1, 2020 / 12:01 pm (CNA).- A federal judge on Tuesday denied an injunction sought by a Protestant ministry against Colorado’s coronavirus health orders, which limit religious gatherings to 175 persons.

Christine Arguello, a judge of the US District Court for the District of Colorado, wrote Sept. 29 that “numerous courts have considered, and persuasively rejected,” arguments similar to those made by the plaintiff, Andrew Wommack Ministries, and that the suit was thus unlikely to succeed.

“Plaintiff seeks to enjoin public health laws in order to allow it to gather a large group of people during a pandemic. Granting such an injunction would present a high risk of harm to the state of Colorado as well as the public generally,” Arguello concluded.

She added that “The state has the responsibility to mitigate the impact of the COVID-19 virus, which is made more difficult when case numbers increase. The relief Plaintiff requests has the potential to increase case numbers significantly, placing a high burden on the state. Further, Plaintiff would be compromising the health of the public, which could cause the death of an untold number of innocent citizens.”

Liberty Counsel, which is representing the ministry, immediately appealed the ruling.

Matt Staver, founder of Liberty Counsel, commented that “The virus does not discriminate between nonreligious and religious gatherings, but Gov. Jared Polis does. There is no constitutional justification to treat nonreligious gatherings better than religious gatherings. The First Amendment gives preferential treatment to the free exercise of religion. We look forward to presenting arguments to the Court of Appeals.”

Andrew Wommack Ministries was seeking relief to hold a conference meant to start Oct. 5 in Woodland Park, in Teller County about 20 miles northwest of Colorado Springs, and expected to gather at least 600 persons.

A conference held by the group at the beginning of July was linked to a Covid-19 outbreak. The outbreak consists of 24 staff who have tested positive, and 16 attendees. One attendee died, according to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment.

Andrew Wommack Ministries’ suit against the public health orders said they restrict its religious activites “if the number in attendance exceeds arbitrarily imposed numerical limitations and capacity limitations that are not imposed on numerous nonreligious gatherings of like kind” and impose “discriminatory and disparate prohibitions on the types of activities that AWMI may engage in at their own facilities, as the orders allow AWMI to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, house the homeless, provide other material social services and necessities of life to an unlimited number of individuals with unlimited volunteers in a single facility, but the Orders prohibit AWMI from engaging in a religious conference, ministry, event, gathering, or service with the same individuals in the same facility.”

The suit also argued that religious events are treated differently from large protests: “while the Governor has unilaterally and significantly restricted the number of individuals permitted to assemble or participate in AWMI’s religious activities, he has excused from such restrictions untold thousands of protesters who have gathered all throughout Colorado cities, with no social distancing, and with no threat of criminal or legal sanction.”

Earlier this year the US Supreme Court, in 5-4 decisions, upheld coronavirus regulations of religious gatherings in both Nevada and California.

On July 24 it upheld Nevada’s regulation that limits attendance at indoor religious services to 50 persons. Some businesses in the state, such as casinos, may admit 50% of their capacity.

Justice Samuel Alito wrote a dissent which was joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh, while Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote a separate dissent and Kavanaugh added his own thoughts.

Gorsuch’s brief dissent observed that “this is a simple case. Under the Governor’s edict, a 10- screen ‘multiplex’ may host 500 moviegoers at any time. A casino, too, may cater to hundreds at once, with perhaps six people huddled at each craps table here and a similar number gathered around every roulette wheel there. Large numbers and close quarters are fine in such places. But churches, synagogues, and mosques are banned from admitting more than 50 worshippers—no matter how large the building, how distant the individuals, how many wear face masks, no matter the precautions at all.”

“In Nevada, it seems, it is better to be in entertainment than religion. Maybe that is nothing new. But the First Amendment prohibits such obvious discrimination against the exercise of religion. The world we inhabit today, with a pandemic upon us, poses unusual challenges. But there is no world in which the Constitution permits Nevada to favor Caesars Palace over Calvary Chapel,” he wrote.

In May, the court ruled in favor of California’s limits on the number of people who may attend a church service, emphasizing the need to defer to elected officials amid efforts to respond to coronavirus.

On the other hand, a US District Judge in May blocked the North Carolina governor’s order limiting most church services to 10 people or fewer, saying it was a double standard to limit religious services but not similar activities under anti-coronavirus restrictions.

[…]