In 1960, then-presidential candidate John F. Kennedy set a standard for Catholic politicians seeking federal office in a nation still viscerally anti-Catholic. In a speech to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association, the Democratic senator from Massachusetts declared that he separates church from state in his soul. He was not ambiguous about which had priority.
I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute…. I believe in a President whose religious views are his own private affair…. I am not the Catholic candidate for President. I am the Democratic Party’s candidate for President who happens also to be a Catholic. I do not speak for my church on public matters—and the church does not speak for me.
In 1984, when abortion, after over a decade of political vacillation, had hardened as a good to Democrats and an evil to Republicans, Catholic Democrats were seeking some justification for choosing their party over their faith in an election year that featured Catholic and abortion-supporting Geraldine Ferraro as vice-presidential candidate under Walter Mondale. New York Governor Mario Cuomo stepped forward to present a solution.
In a speech delivered at the University of Notre Dame entitled “Religious Belief and Public Morality: A Catholic Governor’s Perspective,” Cuomo gave the impression of a conscience wrestling with the abortion issue that his Church opposed but his party supported. In fact, Cuomo developed the Kennedy Doctrine to cover support for immorality in what became known as the “Personally Opposed, But” argument. The “Personally Opposed” half insincerely genuflects to Catholicism by acknowledging its teaching against abortion and the holders’ claimed abhorrence of it. The “But” half trumps the former by claiming that the politician cannot impose his personal religious beliefs on Americans, so the politician can support abortion in office.
Cuomo did not use the phrase “Personally Opposed”; he chose to equivocate with a series of rhetorical questions:
I accept the Church’s teaching on abortion. Must I insist you do? By law? By denying you Medicaid funding? By a constitutional amendment? If so, which one? Would that be the best way to avoid abortions or to prevent them? …
Certainly, we should not be forced to mold Catholic morality to conform to disagreement by non-Catholics however sincere or severe their disagreement. Our bishops should be teachers not pollsters. They should not change what we Catholics believe in order to ease our consciences or please our friends or protect the Church from criticism.
But if the breadth, intensity and sincerity of opposition to church teaching shouldn’t be allowed to shape our Catholic morality, it can’t help but determine our ability—our realistic, political ability—to translate our Catholic morality into civil law, a law not for the believers who don’t need it but for the disbelievers who reject it.
Cuomo’s tactic guided Catholic Democrats’ appropriation of abortion until the late 2000s, when the Democratic Party shed any doubts about abortion’s goodness: no longer relegated to “safe, legal, and rare,” Democrats exalted abortion as the holy cornerstone of “women’s reproductive rights.” Politicians of Cuomo’s era—Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi chief among them—would carry on pretending they could reconcile their religion with their support for abortion.
But Catholic Democrats of the generation after them quit bothering their consciences: they have accepted abortion without hesitation, as it is a requirement for seeking a nomination as a Democrat, and, at least publicly, they have paid no mind to religion.
When Roe v. Wade fell, Republicans were forced to craft a new approach to abortion as a political issue. They needed specific plans of opposition, and, to date, no one has come forward with a workable vision. With abortion consistently winning protection on state ballot referenda since 2022, some Republicans are now seeing abortion opposition as a political liability. Since Republicans today attend religious services more regularly than Democrats, the situation has flipped: forty years after Cuomo sought to cover for Catholic Democrats’ embrace of abortion, now some Catholic Republicans are imitating their yesteryear rivals.
Now, in 2024, the Republican senator and Catholic convert JD Vance has been nominated as the GOP vice-presidential candidate under Donald Trump, who has declared abortion to be strictly an issue for states. Vance, who, as his political enemies are fond to point out, declared during his 2022 senate run that he “certainly would like abortion to be illegal nationally,” now is following Trump in disavowing any federal ban on abortion. “We want the federal government to focus on these big economic and immigration questions,” Vance argued. “Let the states figure out their own abortion policy.”
A politician can oppose abortion in multiple ways, and choosing the states-only route is not necessarily an abdication of the pro-life cause—though it is not without its problems, as will be noted below. This position falls short of the federal limits that most pro-lifers desire, but it is certainly a far cry from Mario Cuomo’s “Personally Opposed, But” approach that is really an affirmation of legal abortion.
Yet, in an August 14 interview with the NY Post, Vance’s self-justification for dithering on abortion and for supporting IVF echoed that of Cuomo. In fairness to Vance, the transcript of the interview is not available. Headlines can be misleading, as was the case with this Vance interview on the topic, and quotations can be manipulated in a news article to change the speaker’s tenor. That said, Vance’s printed responses are problematic.
Shortly after his conversion in 2019, Vance told Rod Dreher that “[m]y views on public policy and what the optimal state should look like are pretty aligned with Catholic social teaching. That was one of the things that drew me to the Catholic Church. I saw a real overlap between what I would like to see and what the Catholic Church would like to see.”
To the NY Post, Vance distanced himself—and America—from the same Catholic social teaching with which he once aligned:
Catholic social teaching is obviously very robust. I think that no person who, or at least no one I know who’s Catholic, doesn’t accept that just because the Catholic Church teaches something, doesn’t mean you necessarily as a legislator need to affect that to public policy….
I think it certainly influences how you think about issues, it certainly influences how I think about issues. But I think that there are a lot of things the Catholic Church teaches that frankly, Americans would just never go for.
As a student of Catholic social teaching (CST), Vance should know well that CST is not a political program, but a set of principles hierarchically ordered to guide politicians and citizens to foster human dignity within a commonwealth. Some principles are more important than others, and they intentionally leave room for political leaders to apply them in their particular circumstances.
In lumping all CST into the pejorative “just because the Catholic Church teaches something” box, he is not only seeking cover for his actions that do not conform to CST. He is borrowing from Mario Cuomo’s speech and rationale. Witness:
As a Catholic, I respect the teaching authority of the bishops. But must I agree with everything in the bishops’ pastoral letter on peace and fight to include it in party platforms? And will I have to do the same for the forthcoming pastoral on economics even if I am an unrepentant supply sider? Must I, having heard the Pope renew the Church’s ban on birth control devices, veto the funding of contraceptive programs for non-Catholics or dissenting Catholics in my State?
As noted in the Post interview, in February Vance threw his support behind a potential bill supporting IVF on the federal level, the first legislation of its kind, despite the Church’s opposition to the practice. He defended himself by appealing to America’s religious pluralism:
You have to accept that you live in a Democratic society where you have to give people a full voice in the society. You have to give people their ability to have their own moral views reflected in public policy. There are a lot of non-Catholics in America and I accept that.
Forty years earlier, Cuomo made this same defense:
[W]e are also a people of many religions, with no established church, who hold different beliefs on many matters. Our public morality, then—the moral standards we maintain for everyone, not just the ones we insist on in our private lives—depends on a consensus view of right and wrong. The values derived from religious belief will not—and should not—be accepted as part of the public morality unless they are shared by the pluralistic community at large, by consensus.
In advocating for immorality in the form of IVF—which is a major step beyond acquiescing to—Vance has placed himself in Cuomo’s camp and at odds with the Church’s teaching on the role of Catholics in political life.
The Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith’s 2002 Doctrinal Note on Some Questions Regarding the Participation of Catholics in Political Life reiterates that “those who are directly involved in lawmaking bodies have a grave and clear obligation to oppose any law that attacks human life. For them, as for every Catholic, it is impossible to promote such laws or to vote for them.”
The states-only approach to abortion limits can also land Vance in a moral quandary. When asked, Vance told NBC’s Meet the Press that a future president Trump would veto any federal bills limiting abortion. The president, not the vice-president, would be morally responsible for such a decision. But should a Catholic vice-president not even make the effort to convince the president to sign such a bill, then he would not only transgress his duties as a Catholic politician, but he would also violate the first principle of natural law: do good and avoid evil.
Finally, states-only approach aside, Vance’s clear support of legal access to the abortion pill mifepristone is deeply problematic. To support mifepristone is to support abortion. Can we say, then, that Vance, since he signed on as Trump’s vice-presidential candidate, is “personally opposed to abortion, but…”?
This is not a matter of the Trump-Vance ticket as a “more moral” option than Harris-Walz. This concerns the integrity of a Catholic politician seeking federal office, and whether he is willing to govern according to Catholic moral teaching—which is nothing other than the natural moral law accessible by reason for all people regardless of religion.
Ironically, Mario Cuomo articulated how this can be done before rejecting it in favor of moral compromise:
I can, if so inclined, demand some kind of law against abortion not because my Bishops say it is wrong but because I think that the whole community, regardless of its religious beliefs, should agree on the importance of protecting life—including life in the womb, which is at the very least potentially human and should not be extinguished casually.
Since his nomination as vice-president, Vance has yet to make an attempt to defend human life and oppose abortion in this manner.
Will Senator Vance address, in writing and at length, his understanding of the role of the Catholic politician on the undercard of a presidential candidate who, in order to win votes, is openly supporting immoral practices that Catholics oppose?
Because, right now, Vance sounds an awful lot like the Catholic Democrats of old—compromising his faith for the sake of political gain.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
Where are all the hypocrites who are now silent / not calling for Vance to be denied communion? For the record, I believe he should be denied access to the Blessed Sacrament until and unless he repents of his pro-abort stance. And, I have never voted for a pro-abortion candidate and will not begin doing so now. Donald Trump has destroyed the Republican Party by transforming it into a pro-abortion party. What he has done is diabolical – and I don’t mean that figuratively.
This perspective is delusional and indicative of Trump Derangement Syndrome. Trump has not turned the Republican party into a pro-abortion party. Nothing like that has happened, so your assertion is a lie. Last time I checked, lying was a sin, so it might be a good idea for you to take the beam out of your own eye before trying to take the speck out of your brother’s.
A typical tactic of the MAGA Catholic crowd — can’t respond to the actual substantive critique so start screeching about ‘Trump Derangement Syndrome.’ Team Trump has very clearly watered down the pro-life agenda of the Republican Party. The current platform’s position on abortion obviously reflects this. Vance assuring on Meet the Press that Trump would veto a national abortion ban shows just how ‘pro-life’ Trump is. And as the above essay points out, ‘serious Catholic’ JD Vance is especially shameless in his eagerness to backoff his pro-life positions to please the orange man. It’s pretty amusing how a number of the “you must support the lesser of two evils” Catholics don’t want to have to confront all the garbage and hypocrisy that emanates from Trumpworl.
“Catholics don’t want to have to confront all the garbage and hypocrisy that emanates from Trumpworl.”
*****
Have you considered what emanates from the other political party & that we only have two viable choices to make in November? Or that there are a host of other issues like parental rights, child mutilation, & WWIII?
This is a false dilemma. It is not the case that one side has to be the bad guys and the other must be the good guys. Long ago, we arguably had two good candidates running for president. Not in your lifetime, nor in mine, but once. Today, the two big parties both have very bad candidates representing them. No one is forcing you to declare one of them to be good. If you choose the “lesser evil”, you are choosing that evil of your own free will. But it does bring up a serious question: Is there ANY evil which is so great in itself that you would not support it, even if it seems to be the only worldly alternative to a greater evil? Is there any hill you would be willing to die on — and if not this one, which hill?
This is not a question about practicality. The game’s over for us from a practical point of view. Even if the pro-life side had been willing to punish the GOP for disobedience, the way the abortion and LGBT lobbies punished the Democrats for disobedience until they had full control of that party, mere politics was never going to save this country’s collective soul.
Regardless, that moment has passed; the GOP has abandoned the pro-life side and will not look back (especially when they are rewarded with votes anyhow). It’s now a question of character and priorities. You cannot steer the direction of the country — certainly not with your vote, which is of negligible effect compared to a single Hail Mary. But you can choose what you are willing to cheer on.
Outis, politics has always been a question of practicality. We aren’t electing a pope. This is strictly secular business.
Mrs Cracker — Your vote for president is not just a vote for president. Every politician who just wants to win is watching to see how much he can get away with. He knows there are “centrists” who might like the GOP for, say, foreign policy, or tax policy, or immigration policy, but he will lose that “centrist” vote if he stands fast against abortion. If he knows that FAILING to stand fast will lose a significant number of pro-life votes, he might withstand that temptation. If, on the other hand, he sees that he can get these votes in the middle by caving on abortion without paying any price whatsoever, because it turns out the “pro-life” side isn’t as serious about abortion as the 2nd Amendment people are about guns or the LGBTQ community are about perversion, he will drop any pretense of caring about the unborn. The whole pro-life movement will become nothing more than a historical relict of no political importance, like the people who want us to go back to linking the dollar to reserves of precious metals.
From a practical perspective, your vote is less about whether you will get Trump or Harris and more about whether the GOP can drop the pro-life (and pro-family, which no one seems to care about these days) planks forever and without penalty.
That said, there is more than practicality to this. The practical political thing has always been to offer the pinch of incense to Caesar.
A typical tactic of the left – calling people MAGA. There is no substance in the original post, so a substantive critique is not necessary. Having ruled that Roe v. Wade is unconstitutional, the matter has been returned to the states. It is not a politician’s responsibility to change the culture – Christians are called to do that. That is best done at the local and state level by individuals, not the government.
States are exactly where laws regulating feticide can be made today. That was the whole point of overturning Roe. It gave that right back to each state. Praise God.
Some might say that it is a matter for a STATE politician to address the matter if it is returned to the states. Some might also say that if a national politician says that a pro-life state law is “too extreme” for his tastes, he is subject to criticism for butting in, even if you insist on defending his defense of the indefensible. But no, Mrs. Cracker is right: Trump is not RUNNING for Messiah of the USA. He has already won your hearts in that regard, so nothing he does may be criticized.
There are no perfect human beings. Perfect is not running here nor has it ever. Weigh all the differences and Trump/Vance comes out not only the best but possibly the best ever.
It’s interesting. In his wholly political invocation to the Democrats, Blaise Cupich issued the following words “..root out ongoing injustices in our national life, especially those created by moral blindness and fear of the other.”
The political left takes great pains not only to “fear the other”, it takes great pains to create others, foment hate and fear and to label the other. Whether they create a label “basket of deplorables”, “transphobic” or take a vilify a phrase “Make America Great Again”; a considerable amount of their rhetorical effort is is to devoted to the Alinsky mandate of identifying a target and freezing it and of course, in order to activate the foot soldiers, you must activate them.
The question before us this time is how we go over the cliff. Like the gravity of a black hole; our fiscal bankruptcy, and the moral ignorance and idolatry of the state that underly it creates a region of inescapability.
Our acknowledged national debt is $36 TRILLION, twenty years ago, it was a was just under $8 TRILLION. Several states and large cities are even worse. There’s not a shred of evidence that there’s the slightest bit of concern by any meaningful portion of our ruling class that our toes are on the cliff.
You voting for Kamala or third party?
A mean comment.
1. Both Trump and Vance have publicly stated that they support nationwide access to the abortion pill during the first trimester. That accounts for something like 90% of all abortions in the United States.
2. Both Trump and Vance have stated that Trump would veto a national abortion ban if it were passed by Congress.
3. Trump forced the Republican Party to modify its platform to abandon its unequivocal pro-life stance, instead taking a “leave it to the states” position. That’s not dissimilar to the position of the compromise with the Southern states on slavery prior to the Civil War.
No one forced anyone to do anything. Trump simply doesn’t have that much power. Trump should absolutely veto a national abortion ban. The issue belongs to the states. Try to look past your TDS if possible.
Athanasius – It is generally acknowledged that Trump forced the GOP to remove the pro-life plank from its platform, replacing it with the position that the issue should be left to the states. How would you feel leaving it up to the states to decide the issue of slavery? Is slavery any worse than murder of the unborn? Of course any truly pro-life politician should welcome and sign legislation passed by Congress that bans abortion nationwide. But he has not even remained neutral on the issue, instead vowing to veto it while publicly stating his support for nationwide access to the abortion pill during the first trimester and for IVF (which results in the destruction of many thousands of unborn human beings every year). One wonders who is actually suffering from a form of “TDS” if they can’t see the reality of this? Or is it support for Trump at all costs, with no criticism, no matter what?
BXVI: From what I’ve heard Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation was a wartime measure and would likely have had no constitutional basis after the war ended. This resulted in the 13th Amendment to abolish slavery.
It’s a perfect way to demoralize prolife Catholic voters & incentivize them to stay home on election day.
I’m voting for Trump.
I am too. Trump is not a Catholic Christian and does not claim to be. I would rather have his leadership which showed us for 4 years who he is and what he will do for the country. The Catholics now in government have pretty much all lost their faith entirely decades ago and no longer even know what faith is if they ever had any at all. They are the ones who are leading the lambs to slaughter. Many Catholics will vote for Harris as they voted for Biden and still call themselves Catholic. How do they explain that moral choice to the Lord??
Isn’t it better to start in what we think is the right direction and try to influence a change than to go for the road that clearly leads for to hell? The Democrats have already made their choice clear. I haven’t met a Democrate who will even engage in conversation at this point. Shouldn’t we hope and try to influence the Republican party to take a better path?
The Trump hatred goes deep in this country and the false reasons for hatred are renewed and repeated every day. Where does it stop? Can they win it all if they destroy this one man? Should anyone of conscience help them?
I pray for us all because the Lord will have the last word and I do not want any one of us to be deaf to it. God bless this world of His.
Has it occurred to this writer that we are a multi- cultural, multi-ethnic, multi-faith country, by design?
You have no right to tell me what to do with my spiritual or physical life. Live your own, and let me live mine.
Connaught H Dolan: Many of the forces at work in America have no qualms in using the government to impose their views on the rest of society. Taxpayer funded abortions, stripping conscience protections from healthcare providers to force them to participate in abortions. Forced DEI indoctrination in the schools and at work. The list goes on.
MrsCracker, I couldn’t agree more. This article serves to expose the lunatics we have among us as Catholics.
This article serves to remind us that Catholics must at all times in all circumstances vigorously oppose the murder of in-utero children.
Absolutely!
You know what these people are like? Somebody whose car’s brakes go out as they’re heading straight for a crosswalk with twelve schoolkids in the middle of it. If they choose to swerve away, they’ll hit two kids on the sidewalk, but at least not the twelve crossing the street. But instead of doing that, they jump out of their moving car, saying to themselves in their false, smug, self-righteous self-satisfaction, “*I* don’t hit kids with my car! It goes against my conscience!” and the twelve die instead of the two.
The time to fix the abortion issue in the Republican party – if it can be at all, given how far our culture has slid – is AFTER the election. If the self-indulgent types we see on here refuse to vote for Trump to stop the leftist onslaught we are facing, there won’t be any future we can even attempt to save. They just refuse to wake up.
I agree entirely. The pro life movement needs a reality check. The vast majority of catholics are pro choice just like the general population. I wish it were not so but that is where we are. Abortion which for the record I believe to be a hideous sin will only end with a change of heart.Vance and Trump are being backed into a corner. One word from them hinting at anything to do with the pro life cause will mean defeat and the election of a truly wicked regime who not only approve of abortion but actually delight in it.
they already delight in the money for body parts over at the Planned.
the only reason I do not participate in United Way is because of the link to Planned
Athanasius – If you think Biden and Pelosi should be denied access to holy communion due to their explicit public support for abortion, please explain why Vance should not be denied given his explicit public support for nationwide access to the abortion pill.
Will add I think at lot of Pro Life Catholics are hypocrites. How many pray rosaries in front of abortion centers, how many go to their priest and urge them to say sermons against abortions, how many go to bishops offices telling them to confront local and state politicians on abortion. Let’s face it very very few pro life Catholics walk the talk. So many self righteous upscale Catholics love to criticize Trump, in any possible to satisfy their highly education abortion friendly friends. But there is no way you will see them in the front lines. They will leave the hard dirty work to the very very few pro life Catholics, that will go to Abortion Mills and at least pray their Rosary and show visible support for the unborn.
To G.R.M (and Mrs. Cracker and Dcn. E.P. etc.) – And what about those who are not hypocrites, those, who like me, though far from perfect, do walk the walk: standing out at the abortion clinic, raising funds for pregnancy resource centers, providing (unwanted) parish, pro-life instruction to pro-choice people sitting in the pews, writing to my congressmen, arguing for years with libertarian Catholics who always wanted this issue to just go back to the states and who thought the issue would just go away, encouraging all the priests I know to give pro-life homilies especially during voting season (a bit tough to do in this election cycle) and losing job opportunities for being pro-life. It is not “lunacy” to not vote for Donald Trump over the issue of abortion. It is common sense – I will not vote for a pro-choice candidate. Donald Trump is a pro-choice candidate. Professor Bonagura has amply proven that Trump is a pro-choice candidate, while what the professor writes here is not anything that has not already occurred to many of us. In truth, this disagreement should not surprise anyone. True social conservatives will not vote for pro-choice candidates – those who believe that the “people” can decide whether babies should live or die. I am not a Trump hater. I voted for him in 2016 and 2020, but not this year. (And I will not vote for a Democrat unless I am a corpse and and some corrupt Democrat registers my cold, dead body and holds a pen in my hand). I will tell others that I agree with Trump on many other issues, but that he is stepped on God’s turf this time (the Trump/Vance abortion pill support is unacceptable especially to anyone who stands outside the clinics watching these young ladies go in to get their prescriptions). Further, I tell no one not to vote for Trump. And finally, to all who eat bread with us but keep calling us names, consider that your “big tent” is eventually going to fall down and blow away for each time you pull out a peg that has always kept it “unflappable” and secure.
Inigo: It’s part of God’s plan to fight for His created unborn. Or did you miss the pro-abortion comments that frivolously trivialized their worth above?
Edward. Bonagura, a bright voice for Catholicism, should not gauge his assessment as, “Vance sounds an awful lot like the Catholic Democrats of old”. That is, assessed on the similarity of negative political Catholic positions. Rather on direction. Vance and Trump are taking the country further away from abortion and rampant homosexuality toward life and moral sanity. Whereas Cuomo and Kennedy took us headlong in favor of abortion and homosexuality.
Inigo: How exactly is Trump “pro-choice” in renewing his commitment to vetoing any piece of legislation that includes abortion funding exactly as he did in his firt term, and not appointing federal judges favorable to abortion?
Edward – I never accused Trump of being Rachel Madow-Nancy Pelosi Pro-Choice, nevertheless he is pro-choice for all the reasons cited in this article and in my comments. This did not have to be. He put his left-leaning family full-bore into the campaign mix and this is the result. Trump is also pro-IVF which is also pro-choice and he parties with social liberals over the celebration of yes… wait for it… the “national” legislation to protect gay marriage, even though apparently he doesn’t like national social legislation anymore. Because he can party with the Log Cabin Republicans, he in not just pro-IVF, but mega pro-IVF, which is still not Pelosi-pro, but close to it. Add to this that I did not just discover who JD Vance was when his name came up as a VP contender. I have been watching him for years and and reading the so-called conservative periodicals that supported him and who also dumped the pro-life cause for expediency. The new republican party is pro-choice; not Pelosi-pro, but it has a nice big tent to let even these in as long as they care about the economy.
Edward. My reply to you above is in agreement with your assessment of Trump and Vance.
My God !! How can an anti-abortionist call pro-abortionists “pro-choice” ???
Would you allow your friends or enemies to be pro-choice about rape or armed robbery ?
For God’s sake, you have no credibility.
Please explain (if you are addressing Inigo) Are you saying that “pro-abortionists” want every baby to be killed and they are not for allowing the woman to choose to abort or not? It seems to me that I am not allowing anyone to be pro-choice concerning a heinous crime including abortion, which is why I have decided to not vote for Trump who is now pro-choice on abortion (not as pro-abortion as is Pelosi, but still pro-abortion, if not by action, but still by omission which results in the outcome of abortion).
Inigo Great. Your part of the few Pro Life Catholics that do what all of us should be doing.
Will add to my comment, Trump is the only option for the Pro Life Movement. While not ideal one for sure will not send the FBI to Pro life Proponents, and use the any part of the Law to pursue Indictments of pro life supporters. The left is intent on taking away rights. If your goal is to support the destruction of America, them vote for the K Harris team.
GRM – To your comment below. Trump is not the only option for the pro-life movement, in fact his movements are in the entirely wrong direction (nor should this movement be solely political). This is a Catholic periodical and this issue of life is where our faith hits the road. What we have here are people making comments from all political positions: those who are non-interventionists who would be asking Catholics to vote for Trump even if he were for late term abortions, just to seal their primary cause, there are those who are focused on the “pro-life” (political) movement, and others who are just plain libertarian (or fusionists) who will go pro-life only as far as it adds votes to their ultimate goal of winning at all costs. All the latter want is a big enough tent to win and they would be kicking pro-lifers to the curb if they weren’t so worried right now that every vote counts. But these are all political motivations and as I said this is a Catholic periodical. I write first and foremost as a Catholic. I am not interested in producing more compromised republicans (we have more than enough already)or compromising Catholics (plenty of those too). I am interested in producing more Catholic saints. You and others here are working under the presupposition that voting is merely a political act. It is true that the conscience allows for a certain amount of practicality in politics as was the case with Thomas More. However, with More there came a point where his faith had to rule within his conscience. Is this not what our Church teaches about voting and conscience? In the Man for All Seasons, More was asked if he judged those who would not sign the oath (who would not support the political authority). He responded that he could not look into another man’s conscience. Would you want to take conscience away from More; do you want to take this away from me? Just like More said of oaths, I see voting as “words we say to God”. I will not vote for men who approve of a pill that kills about 60% of the children in the act of abortion. Long before there was any polis, there was the man and the woman and God – the seed of the Church. Without this, politics is a rotting tree. Without the family and the natural law and all that it entails it has become a rotting tree. And Trump is not protecting the family and the natural law in any substantial way; only in superficial ways that will lead Catholics away from their faith and further rot the polis. He has chosen to lead in his Log Cabin fellows; he has put in charge, the carpenter ants.
Vance does not err. There is no right to life. There is just no right to kill one’s baby, and anyone claiming otherwise is a heretic. Making such a claim ought to be sufficient to deny one Communion.
Huh? Wrong:
Should Vance be denied Holy Communion? I would say yes. Should the Harris-Walz ticket be granted the victory in November? I would say no.
The Catholic Church should stop trying to use the man-made government to destroy the evil of abortion. Christ established the Church to change the world. God gave us the teaching of Christ and the Word of God as tools to fight evil. Christ never told his Disciples to go to Rome and write man-made laws to change the world. All of the Church’s time, resources, and money should be used to convince our neighbors to attend Church where they can learn the teachings of Christ and hear the Word of God. Face it, the Federal abortion law was eliminated and the number of abortions in the United States increased. Man-made laws don’t work.
But Pope Francis is saying to “legalize homosexual union”. Wouldn’t that be making man-made law, Gerald? And wouldn’t they be going to Church to find it out there?
Is your opinion very different from the a Democratic Catholics’? The residents of Sodom and Gomorrah were warned about God’s wrath. Noah was tasked with warning his people too. Nowhere is there an example of using legislative powers to legislate solely Catholic morals (so many Christian churches abandoned this policy regarding abortion). That is left to the Islamist controlled counties. If Vance were to follow the path you describe, the last shred of Christian influence will be erased and we will become a truly heathen country. Perhaps the abortion/IVF issues are working their way to where they belong, a personal decision between the individual and her beliefs about God. The church, the Catholic Church, appears to be abandoning the dirty work in enforcing her own beliefs, ie Catholic Colleges, are they really Catholic, and instead placing Catholic politicians in the impossible position of representing her views first.
Our citizenship is in heaven, and we eagerly wait for a Savior from there, the Lord Jesus Christ.”
Philippians 3:20 (CSB)
Amen!
Our citizenship is here too. And it includes opposing pro-aborts indifferent to their crimes against humanity, crimes which you support. You might reconsider whether you should take for granted being heaven bound.
Indeed !!
The man-made government in Washington, DC is not part of God’s plan.
“Perhaps the abortion/IVF issues are working their way to where they belong, a personal decision between the individual and her beliefs about God. ”
***********
Are child sexual exploitation issues working their way to where they belong, a personal decision between the abuser & their beliefs about God? How about rapists, human traffickers, or assassins?
At the end of the day every issue is between the perpetrator & their God. But our laws should reflect the way we value & protect the rights of our citizens & especially the most vulnerable in our society.
That said, in feticide there are always at least two victims: the mother & her child.
Yep. If you can murder the unborn legally, why should the murder of the born remain illegal? If a person wishes for anarchy in their choices regarding child-murder, what purpose remains for government beyond providing more power of oppression to those already powerful?
So you believe God, the creator of universal mandates of natural laws, just has an opinion of no greater importance than any of His creatures? And you believe millions of pro-life atheists and other non-Catholics have no right to oppose the mass crushing of babies through the meat grinder, which you conceive of as idiosyncratic to Catholics? And you believe it would be “heathen” to put an end these mountains of corpses and rivers of blood? And you believe abortion/IVF “issues” are a personal decision between the individual and her beliefs about God who creates lives for no purpose according to your reasoning? And your desire to remain oblivious to the tens of thousands of political battles between Republicans and Democrats for more than half a century over abortion, with Republicans predominately fighting for the unborn, as meaningless? If you desire to peddle a contempt for a Catholic understanding of, well, everything, not to mention history, perhaps you might consider a different forum.
Well put.
Well said.
How would you know what works? You’re apparently unaware that there never was such a thing as a federal law that allowed abortion. It was a lawless court decision. We don’t have a God like power to know the effects of all of our efforts to oppose evil and promote good. Consequentialist reasoning is always wrong. Regardless. The Catholic Church collectively, has been a model of inconsistency. As a veteran of the March for Life for almost its entire history, originally as an athesist, later as a convert, we used to chant “Here are your people. Where are our bishops.” And factually, most of the episcopate finds pro-life Catholics and embarrassment rather than a witness to be supported. They rather enjoy photo-ops or cocktails with celebrities. But the cowardice of giving up is not an option.
Good points. The early church did not convert the Roman Empire by taking over the levers of power. It did so by living obediently, by being salt and light. The government is not the answer.
Last Sunday’s Gospel sums up the attitude of Vance, Cuomo and Kennedy:How can this man give us his body to eat, blood to drink? This is intolerable language!???! These polilicos feel that they can wear their faith on a Sunday for all to see and throw it off until lifted up again in seven days time. Richelieu stated that history was just a matter of dates and that compromise is possible, indeed expected! Christ, as John 6 concluded didn’t compromise He only asked for faith and trust virtues which these morally lame politicians, are all too ready to give up for four years in the glare of the world! Shame on them all!
If Catholics are serious about abortion (which they ought to be since it is a most grevious offense against God), then they ought to do two things:
1. Begin with their own conversion of heart as it affects their own moral conduct. They should answer the simple question of where they stand with regard to God’s law and Church teaching on: divorce and remarriage; frequent use of the Sacrament of Reconciliation, contraception, attendance at Mass on all Sundays and Holy Days of obligation, not performing optional servile work on Sundays (shopping, mowing the grass, etc), having a regular prayer life and practice of almsgiving, performing works of charity that require sacrifice of time and money, and inculcating the teachings of the faith to their children and grandchildren.
2. Having travelled well on their way with #1 above, Ctholics then ought to set out and do everything they can to convert the hearts of those in this culture who dishonor God’s law and teaching day in and day out. In other words, answer the question:”What specifically am I doing to evangelize the pagan culture we live in?”
Let me add this to what I have already written: If you’re expecting a change in politicians and the imposition of law to convert the hearts of those who inhabit our culture, you are seriously deluded. Do you think Germany during the Second World War sent 6 million people to their death because of the Nazi Party and the head of the government, Adolf Hitler? Hardly. Six million human persons were gassed and incinerated because the German culture was immoral and corrupt. It couldn’t have happened otherwise. In the USA alone since 1974 over 60 million babies’ lives have been brutally snatched from them because we live in an immoral and corrupt culture in this country. It couldn’t have happened otherwise. The task we have before us as Catholics is to convert our own hearts and to evangelize the culture. Anything less is whistling Dixie.
What would cause anyone to think that anyone believes that political action is a would be cure-all? I’ve been in the movement for more than half a century, even before Roe. I never met anyone, among hundreds, who believed anything remotely close to this. You make an allusion to WWII. Was the war won on a single front or dozens of fronts? The Army, Navy, Marines, Air power, Spy networks, materials engineering, radar, etc.
Catholics, who as a sociological group are even more pro-abortion than the general population, are not about to convert anyone when we cannot even convert ourselves, and don’t even care to, and are not even willing to honestly face the reality of degenerates in high places corrupting the mandated public witness God gave us.
When I approach a parish to ask if I can give a pro-life talk after Mass, I am as welcome as a leper. And it’s not just my headstrong personality. All pro-life activists get this treatment. A man came to this forum to demean pro-life efforts, and as I write this, I seem to be the only one who noticed.
And most comments on Trump reflect how easily Catholics are willing to accept media mischaracterizations if it gets them off the hook to make clear, prudent, non-lazy distinctions.
I agree…light your candle wherever you are and don’t let anyone blow it out. On today as the memorial for John the Baptist, voices still crying in the wilderness.
As for the sobering numbers game, in addition to the 6 million Jews, the holocaust also claimed almost another 6 million, e,g., 1.8 million ethnic Poles. Then there’s Stalin who is credited with murdering 20 million. And, post-1949 China which some say wiped out 70 million in peacetime under the Great Leap Forward and the resulting Great Famine. Of all such histories, said Comrade Stalin: “a single death is tragic; a million deaths are a statistic.”
In a world addicted to ideology and means over ends, how still to affirm the transcendent dignity of each human person? Deacon Peitler reminds us of the ghetto/suburban ideology driving today’s deep state: instead of Herbert Hoover’s “chicken in every pot,” we now have empty-suit Harris with an aborted child filling every dumpster.
In view of these depraved and flippant times, pray that at least the alternative party will come to its senses. Channeling the 1968 Democrat Presidential candidate, Hubert Humphrey, “never give up, never give in!”
“If you’re expecting a change in politicians and the imposition of law to convert the hearts of those who inhabit our culture, you are seriously deluded”.
The conversion of hearts might come later, but in the meantime it well behoves us to save lives with legislation against abortion.
Excellent post Deacon Edward. I do believe that typical Catholics need clerical and episcopal leadership on these issues. As I have said before, the typical homily falls into the category of “God loves you, have a nice day, and 10 more minutes of elaboration on that. There is no moral teaching.
There are Mass going Catholics in my parish who believe that IVF is a good thing and there has never been a word on that from the pulpit. There was a vote on a pro-life state amendment in my state. It failed. Exit interviews showed that evangelical Christians voted better on this issue than Catholics. I heard from a couple of Catholics that, “Well, there was no exception for rape or incest pregnancies.”
I looked up what the USCCB might have said about IVF. Their statement was that they did not “condone” it. How weak is that? They don’t condone the border wall, but that doesn’t mean it is immoral.
I recall great jubilation from pro-life groups with the Dobbbs decision overturning Roe, and sending it back to the states. That did not turn out as well as we hoped, but that is hardly Trump’s fault. Even the most Pro-life Suprem Court Justices have said that they do not see a guarantee of life for the unborn in the constitution. I wish that Vance had not come out in favor of the abortion pill. Since he was an adult convert, I wonder what quality of RCIA instruction he had. There are parish programs that are lacking in sound teaching.
While I regret the Trump/Vance position on abortion/IVF, I understand it politically. There is NO moral equivalence between the republican candidates and the democrat candidates.
Crusader: I have a friend who sent all of his four children to Catholic schools – from Grade 1 through university. One of his children went to Notre Dame and the other one to Catholic University. Each have had multiple children exclusively through IVF. I doubt if anyone in the Catholic Church ever told them that it’s likely they left some untapped zygotes in a state of perpetual nitrogen suspension.
Voting is, has always been, and forever will be a matter of choosing between the lesser of two evils, which is not to be misunderstood as choosing evil that will be admitted with a vote.
For an essay about that governing principle, and the real and particular choice between Trump and Harris, this essay at Catholic Culture is on point:
https://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/trump-lesser-two-evils-is-moral-choice/
Yes, I agree. I have 2 bad choices, but one is far worse than the other, both in personal beliefs and historical votes and statements, as well as Party affiliation, than the other. I know who I am voting for as a result, to fight the hard left I oppose. Not happy with some of the other choice, but like you said, we have to choose which direction we go.
Pauline –
I agree with you, and to be perfectly clear, I am of course voting for Trump/Vance, to oppose snd put an end to the utterly diabolical Tyranno-Smugness-Queer-Totalitarian-DNC-Anti-Christ-Anti-Human-Machine.
Thanks for the link. I hope that prolifers carefully read this essay so they will not unwittingly put in power the satanic duo so as to help the demonic party to perpetuate abortion without restrictions, gender ideology, indoctrination of school children, taking away parental rights to educate their children, etc.
Prolifers should finally realize that the real battle is not in the political arena, but in the hearts of men. It is not the political war that we should win, but the cultural war for the conversion of men. When an overwhelming majority of Americans consider abortion as infanticide, then politicians will have no choice but to become prolife else they will have no chance to get elected. That is the nature of politics – it follows the culture, the majority. Politics is about gaining power.
For now, prolifers have virtually no choice but to choose the lesser evil. Sitting out this crucial election will hand over power to satan & his minions.
I think that I might prefer politicians who are agnostics over politicians who wear their religion on their sleeve. Any time a politician says that he “talks to God” run, don’t walk to the nearest exit.
Many times we do get non secular guidance but it’s probably your Guardian angel.
Opposing abortion is not pushing a religious belief: it is stating a moral truth, true for all. The “Real Presence” is a religious belief. The fact that killing the unborn is immoral is obvious to all.
Yes. It’s a human rights issue .Religion is not required to support human & civil rights reforms. It doesn’t hurt to have religion, but it’s not required.
Within the Catholic Church, few if any homilies teach anything other than liberal to progressive, liberation theology to the point that all too many do not believe in the Real Presences. No sermons or homilies that Catholics could or should vote in accordance with their Biblical Faith, Hope and Trust in the Way, the Life and the Truth of God. Our local non-denomination community church offer a classes in Biblical Citizenship that is far more Catholic that what is offered in our homilies.
Politics follows culture. Faith follows God’s laws. Faith cannot be forced upon people. Political policies, decided by majority, can be enforced under threat of legal consequences.
The current state of US culture is materialistic, comfort/pleasure-seeking. It is natural for politicians to conform to this culture, albeit in various degrees. The Bidens & the Pelosis are all-in the culture of death & gender ideology, Trump/Vance are in the watered-down abortion camp (with many restrictions that may appeal to more moderate reasonable voters, but not to hardcore godless liberals). To pursue a total ban on abortion (except when the mother’s life is at risk) is political suicide, as NO ONE will ever win a US election with this stand. To take the position of a total ban on abortion is to surrender political power to a satanic party that will ensure abortion without restriction, gender ideology, indoctrination of school children, taking away parental rights to educate their children, & other satanic policies will be perpetuated.
Trump/Vance & GOP Senate, GOP House, conservative SCOTUS are short term stop gap solution to halt the perpetuation of evil in American society & its destruction. The longterm solution is the conversion of hearts to God. When a large majority of Americans are converted, then politics will follow. Making abortion a serious crime (infanticide) will become the law of the land. The ultimate battle is not in the ballot box, but in the pews, schools, & homes.
This is the current state in an Asian country where a large majority of people consider abortion as infanticide. Its constitution states:
“The State recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall protect and strengthen the family as a basic autonomous social institution. It shall equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from conception. The natural and primary right and duty of parents in the rearing of the youth for civic efficiency and the development of moral character shall receive the support of the Government. “
For over a century, abortion has been criminalized here. Physicians and midwives who perform abortions face up to six years in prison.
This is possible in the US, ONLY when the vast majority of Americans fully understand the evil of abortion. Until this happens, Trump/Vance with their watered down abortion policies is the lesser of two evils.
Only a generation ago, abortion was anathema to U.S. citizens, and the rest of the Western Christian world. Since then the feminist news, current affairs and entertainment media have brainwashed the couch potatoes to believe that “it’s only a clump of cells”, etc.
While we have corrupt feminist media our citizens will never vote for a real pro-life candidate.
How to bring integrity back into the media ?
Is it “either/or” or both and ? Is it possible to straddle the fence?
If we lived under a Christian monarch instead of a Constitutional Republic, perhaps a law would work to eliminate all legal abortions. Such is not the case.
We must work with imperfect politicians who have chosen to do their best within an imperfect, flawed system. Some states will ban/limit abortions. Excellent. Other states not so much. Nevertheless, Roe is gone.
Prayer, sacrifice and generosity towards the mother seems to be the better alternative.
The election in November, as always, carries serious consequences for our country. Sen Vance’s political opposition will be ruthless against Christianity, the Catholic Church and the unborn. Bet on it.
Amen.
Well then, Professor, vote for Harris/Walz. I am sure that will satisfy your well formed and informed Catholic conscience. You, along with Cupich, McElroy, Tobin, Stowe et al will sleep much better knowing that you didn’t vote for Trump, which after all is the whole point, isn’t it?
The rest of us will deal with the binary choice presented and the conundrum given us (and Vance) by an increasingly pro-abortion and progressive episcopate, an equivocating Vicar of Christ, and the quivering Catholic intellectual elite who are terrified (or are they?) of their colleagues in academia, desperate to display their anti-Trump bona fides (which by and large are constructed on the foundation of reports provided by a hostile press).
And, if you haven’t noticed, Professor, the USCCB appears in practice to have adopted the Cuomo position lock, stock and barrel. Consistency would dictate taking down the USCCB. Of course, the good bishops are far more clever than Vance, never leaving a paper trail to document their straying … well, in the case of Vance … a hostile newspaper trail.
So true!
To all those to whom I look UP because of your moral superiority – whom would you rather see as VP? Whom would you rather see as President?
Cliche time – to every one of you who DOESN’T vote because of your moral superiority – that means it’s one less vote needed for you-know-who.
So – PLEASE – On November 5 holdyournoseandcastyourvote – but VOTE.
Then go say the Rosary (Tuesday – the sorrowful mysteries) for our country.
Why tie a proposed POLITICAL policy of protecting human life in the womb to the teachings of the Catholic Church, thus allowing the partisan proponents of abortion to claim the POLITICAL high ground of preventing the establishment of religion in violation of the First Amendment? Our governments, state and federal, regard protection of human life, as a (perhaps the) prime purpose of governments, and they follow that ideal in most of their laws, the prime exception being their failure to protect human life in the womb. Protecting the lives of living, developing human beings is a humanitarian and thus a POLITICAL no-brainer. Like it or not, that must be the arena of our pro-life argumentation.
Right on !
I find I’m with Kazoy above – “The longterm solution is the conversion of hearts to God”. This leads back to Deacon Peitler’s two-step plan above (Aug. 28, 2:37 a.m.), especially step one.
The culture has come a long way since Kennedy and Cuomo and I’m not sure it’s fair to write off Vance so quickly.
Where does one draw the line? Each clergyman is a sinner and unworthy to consecrate the host. Should they remove themselves from the priesthood? Every professor at a Catholic seminary is impure in some way? Shouldn’t they resign? Major retail stores often donate to pro abortion causes. Should you stop shopping there? You may get a necessary medication from a pharma company that supports abortion directly or indirectly. Should you stop taking your medication? A politician may be a stop gap to the collapse of a civilization but supports aspects of abortion. Should you not vote for the politician? You (me) are a sinner? Should we be unqualified to speak on anything?
Every time we compromise, we just move further and further into evil. The abortionists never compromise, and they are winning almost every battle. It’s time pro-life people stopped compromising and made it clear that candidates such as Trump and Vance are simply unacceptable, period, regardless of who is opposing them. No more compromises. I find Vance’s flip-flop on pro-life issues reprehensible, and I suspect that Trump got more than he really wanted with Dobbs, so I’m even reluctant to give him credit for that at this point. The Republicans have basically kicked us out of their party. It’s time for pro-life people to move along– or are we really serious about advancing the pro-life cause?
Hear ! Hear !
Yes Andrew, we must separate and come out from amount them. We are to be in the world but of the world. We must not compromise the means to gain the end.
It’s time for prolife people to get to work at their own state level to enact change & quite throwing wrenches in this presidential election. Drilling holes in the lifeboats as the nation sinks…
Due Process is binding in both State And Federal Court, thus it is unconstitutional in both State and Federal Law to deny any person, regardless of their location, including if they are residing in their mother’s womb.,
Due Process is binding in both State And Federal Court, thus it is unconstitutional in both State and Federal Law to deny any person, regardless of their location, including if they are residing in their mother’s womb, Due Process. Is it any wonder that the Courts are trying to pretend they do not know for certain if the child in their mother’s womb is a human person, even they have absolutely no evidence of human persons conceiving a son or daughter who is not, in essence, a human person?
Unfortunately, under our current law, those residing in the womb, are not persons as the law defines a person.
How does the Law define person?
Certainly we can know through both Faith and reason , The Law does not define persons as a place or a thing or the Law would contain a substantive error.
Don’t chastise Trump and Vance on abortion. Chastise Catholic leaders.
We cannot expect a secular Republican party to carry the main responsibility for ending abortion. The responsibility to convert hearts, minds, and wills rests mainly with the Catholic Church which is the beneficiary of the fullness of Christ’s teaching.
Only when the hierarchy more faithfully and forcefully catechizes the Catholic electorate on abortion will Catholics go to the polls in overwhelming numbers and give pro-life politicians the votes they need to get elected.
But instead of good catechesis on the evil of abortion, we have a pope and bishops who welcome pro-abort Catholic politicians for photo-ops instead of excommunicating them. And we hear very little against abortion from most pulpits—leading Catholics to believe abortion can’t be all that evil.
I attend several parishes, and I cannot remember the last time I heard one forceful homily against abortion! Even on annual pro-life Sundays, all I remember hearing or seeing in the last several years is one watered-down “pro-life” message in the parish bulletin that made all social justice issues equal to the annual travesty of almost one million murdered babies in the womb.
Also–for all the pro-life accomplishments of Trump’s first term of getting pro-life judges all through the judiciary including the Supreme Court, repeal of Roe v Wade, and an Administration friendly to pro-life—all the thanks Trump got was an insinuation from the pope that he was not Christian because Trump did not support open borders!
So with such lukewarm catechesis and public support from the Church, it is amazing that there is still any support at all in the Republican party to put limits on abortion!
And people forget the more than fifty pieces of legislation with pro-abortion funding legislation foreign and domestic that he rejected. Or the other federal judges where he applied a litmus test of their not supporting abortion.
Many of these comments cause me to have to repeat my oft repeated comment. If pro-lifers refuse to accept half a loaf ( FOR NOW!) because they cant have the whole loaf ( no abortions ever) no Catholic will EVER be elected to office to either mitigate abortion or to act on other Catholic principles.
This is NOT a Catholic country, and we do not have a homogenous system of religious belief here. Throwing the issue back to the states because TRUMP appointed a few conservative Justices is the reason even that small positive step happened. Bet your boots it would not have happened if Clinton had been elected instead. Take what you can get and work on getting the rest. Its the only sensible thing to do. Any other position is childish and will get you nowhere. To make a difference, a pro-lifer must first be elected into power. In this hyper-liberal society, its already an uphill battle. If a politician cannot even get Catholic votes because their base is having a tantrum, dont expect anything to change.
“To make a difference, a pro-lifer must first be elected into power.”
The problem is that Trump and Vance aren’t pro-life anymore. I’ve been around long enough to see this before with Al Gore, Bob Casey, Jr., etc. When a man sells his soul for power, his career doesn’t hand it back to him.
You can make an argument that it’s prudential to vote for pro-abortion Republicans this fall, but it also may be prudent, in the long run, to ditch them right now and let them see that “lesser evil” (and don’t underestimate the evil) is political suicide.
I really believe sometimes that there are pro-lifers hoping for a Chastisement & Second Coming. Maybe a Harris/Walz regime will bring that about with WWIII.
Who knows?
As for me, I’m voting for Trump.
Amen
The principle of democracy is not so much that the people are always right, but that the government should not be at war with its own people. It’s a solid principle for fallen people governing fallen people. Little good comes of war between a government and its people. But this principle will also mean that the government must permit or even sponsor things that are against the conscience of the individual politician, and that are against the moral teaching of churches. This is a problem, and we should take it seriously. But what is the alternative? To advocate for a government that will go to war against its own people? To refuse to participate in the government or in the process of selecting the government unless the people and the platform of the parties are pure as snow? Should that time ever come, why would we need government at all?
Amen
Is it so much to ask to have a candidate (like Lincoln) who says, NOT that he is “personally opposed to slavery but will not impose his morality”, but rather, “Slavery as practiced is morally wrong, but at the moment it is necessary to make political compromises”? You may think they are essentially the same. By no means. The first formula implies, weirdly, that there is a moral duty not to impose morality. Saint John the Baptist, intercede against such folly! The second formula recognizes, with Shakespeare’s character of the son of MacDuff in “MacBeth,” that there may be too many “thieves and murderers” (or slave owners, or whatever) for the imposition of morality by “honest men” to be immediately practical.
Trump was good on abortion and LGBT things before because he had Mike Pence as his VP, and Pence helped Trump appeal to Evangelical and Catholic pro-life voters. Even with a Catholic VP candidate now (Vance) Trump is not feeling the need to appeal to pro-life voters since he has many people liking him for his own personality etc. God may have spared his life from that bullet, but not for Trump to turn pro-abortion and pro LGBT. Remember Trump came out with this change in position AFTER the attempt on his life. Not a good way to thank God.
I don’t think Donald Trump has changed his views much. He is what he is- for better or worse.
I agree you might expect better after missing death by a fraction of an inch. It’s not a great way to thank God but falling right into the Democrat’s trap re. a federal feticide abolition is not a great way to win an election either.
I’ve seen several YouTube Harris ads claiming Donald Trump will turn America into a virtual Handmaid’s Tale. If he shows any partiality to prolife laws it’s going to be an instant “gotcha” moment for Democrats.
Politics isn’t for the fainthearted.
For goodness sake, get hold of your thinking. The Catholic Church and like minded people abhor divorce, stealing, contraceptives, abortion, and a host of other things, but we live in a society with a variety of seriously variant moral opinions and are no longer guided by a common morality (and probably never have been). If we wait until we all agree on moral issues we will never be part of the governance of any country. The moral tone of society is the responsibility of us all in our daily life not just a potential VP. That does not mean we cannot vote for a good candidate but must leave the selection to the most goofy ‘left’ and ex-communicate Catholics who would improve the moral and practical tone of life
What aspect of the author’s thinking, exactly, is bothersome to you? That he thinks (correctly, of course) that a politician who professes to be Catholic should actually uphold Catholic principles and beliefs? And not undermine or dismiss them?
So, is stealing something that should be allowed, depending on the state or the general consensus of a group of people? Have we sunk so low that we cannot even acknowledge that stealing is wrong and contrary to lawful behavior?
“If we wait until we all agree on moral issues we will never be part of the governance of any country.”
That’s not the point, is it?
“The moral tone of society is the responsibility of us all in our daily life not just a potential VP.”
And where did the author suggest otherwise? But, does this mean the VP’s moral choices cannot be criticized? If so, shall we also cease any criticisms of Harris and her policy choices?
No politician is above criticism & both of our GOP candidates have given us plenty to criticize lately. However they’re walking a tightrope between Democrat narratives to defeat them. We can’t expect them to willingly fall into that trap.
I’m not sure if I am disagreeing with you, but in San Francisco a laid-back attitude to looting and shoplifting has led to a serious exodus of major retailers from the city. The soft on crime left-wing DAs have sunk pretty low, as did many in city leadership positions during the 2020 “Summer of Love” riots. The left are completely self-righteous. Their definition of freedom appears to be totally unconstrained behavior and power for them. The Founding Fathers understood human nature and created a republic with a constitution, divided government, checks and balances, and the rule of law with due process to decentralize power. This is unacceptable to the left who look like they want to use the state to achieve the total concentration of power in their hands. The main attraction of Marxism is the absolute power that it gives the ruling class.
Politics before faith? J.D. Vance has LOTS of company. But then, we have already been told that broad is the way, and many there be which go in thereat.
JD Vance is not running for US Messiah. For goodness sakes.
Neither is Harris or Walz. If you can excuse everything Trump or Vance does, because they are not running for Messiah, then you excuse everything Harris or Walz do by the same standard.
Maybe you should raise the standards a bit. The GOP has never been a divine party (though both parties have and continue to receive idolatrous worship), but NOT THAT LONG AGO it stood for more. It is NOT a ridiculously high standard to say that the GOP should maintain the pro-life plank it had since Reagan … until Trump changed it and Vance celebrated the change.
I could care less how the other candidates behave in private life. It’s completely their own business & not mine.
Neither do I care what the man who picks up our trash does in his spare time or any other public servant. I just care about how they fulfill their duties. And for politicians, what their past records have been.
COULD you care less? Or would you rush to celebrate Kamala Harris if only Trump were to adopt a worse position? Say, that the first pregnancy every woman has MUST end in abortion? After all, you are voting for the lesser evil, however intrinsic it might be? Or maybe it is only intrinsic in proportion to how much you dislike other aspects of the candidate’s position?
Whatever. You are creating a Republican Party for which I will never vote, not even for dog-catcher. They might be worthy of your vote, but not of mine.
Please do not follow the broad path. You have been warned.
Thank you Outis. What you and I seem to care about is when the man who picks up the trash gives support in his spare time to the Log Cabin Republicans. I hear you, and those who don’t can’t understand that the progressive social agenda has always been about bringing their private lives into the public sphere so as to make it the predominant morality, to excoriate what they call the “hetero normative code” (otherwise known as Christianity) Trump once said that he would let Bruce TransJenner use whichever bathroom he would choose in Trump Tower, because Trump is not a social conservative just like many here writing are not. They are libertarians or progressives. They may not like it when the progressives say “don’t bring your laws into our bedrooms” but they don’t lift a finger when the feminists and LGBT activists bring their bedrooms into our laws. So you see they really don’t care about how people behave in their personal lives, because they are fine with (or don’t give consideration to) these personal lives reconstructing, redefining, and canceling out our public lives and the common good. And right now the Log Cabiners are “endorsing” candidates, but like all social progressives who come to power they will be doing the opposite by “censuring” and “cancelling” those that oppose them.
Catholic World News chose not to post my comment of a day or two ago saying that a single Hail Mary is infinitely more powerful than any vote. Presumably they disagreed, being nothing more than pagans pretending to be Catholics; there is ample evidence to back this up. Probably they will not post this, either; it is enough if they read it before choosing to pretend it never happened. It’s their business, literally — they make money off this, it is not any kind of ministry. Be that as it may; if you happen to see this, remember that your prayer might make a difference for the better. Your vote will not. This election will result in either a bad man or a bad woman taking office. Even bad people can repent, however. We must pray that they do — both of them, really, but especially the one who takes office.
This is it for me. I am disgusted with the conversation and with Catholic World Report. I had a lot more respect for the publication and for its readers until the reality became simply undeniable. But then, you will probably never see it. Not good for business, you know, and the shekels MUST come pouring in.
Ah, yes, the shekels are pouring in. That’s why it took so long to moderate your comments: we had to dig out from under the piles of filthy lucre.
Rubbish Outis. I praised your comments already and also expressed outright disagreement. I do not believe I overstepped for the praise nor do I believe I was especially condemnatory for the disagreement and the rap.
CWR is extremely fair in its screening -just considering alone that we are sinners. So now hold on to your wits. I do not subscribe to CWR, I make endless comments that they pass including a few I might like to revoke. I think I can sense the same done for others. It describes an openness and soundness possessed in more than one editor which we do not always appreciate because we can’t see that far.
You write intelligently in general. I put it to you that some levels of sensitivity or over-sensitivity will deface everything including intelligence so just you be careful. Or should I say insensitivity.
Bonagura, a bright voice for Catholicism, should not gauge his assessment as, “Vance sounds an awful lot like the Catholic Democrats of old”. That is, assessed on the similarity of negative political Catholic positions. Rather on direction. Vance and Trump are taking the country further away from abortion and rampant homosexuality toward life and moral sanity. Whereas Cuomo and Kennedy took us headlong in favor of abortion and homosexuality.
Yeah just vote for the Catholic 3rd party candidate, folks, and watch the country continue to plummet into communism and lawlessness. We have to live in the real world and make lesser of evil choices, not that Pres Trump is anything like Sleepy Joe or Killer Kamala, oh and terrible Tim,Pres Trump’s been a friend of Christians and Catholics in particular.Get your heads out of the 1950’s people, this is 2024.
David;
Your 8/30 @4:56 am – Ditto
HOLDYOURNOSEANDCASTYOURVOTE but – VOTE
Then say a Rosary – It’s on a Tuesday so it’s the sorrowful mysteries
One of the ‘hidden dangers ‘, as well narrated in sites such as catholicexorcism.org
operating in the leader of the opposing side could be the ‘generational spirits ‘ – as spirits of seduction , identity confusions, even death spirits – related to the faith background …which might make one cave in when faced with persons who carry stronger ones -? such as the Iran deal under Obama , who seems to be holding the reins again …the hardness of hearts to deny the truth of children as belonging to a God of Love , destined to bring generational blessings – may the site of little children running around the White House be one blessing that The Mother would obtain for the nation and the world ..to also bring out the truth that promoting carnality is what likely feeds the death mills whereas when families are set free in holiness to cherish a life of prayer and worship , its fruits of joy and peace as self control would bring much good into all realms – nature itself too !
Not sure what error Vance is guilty of.
There is no right to “choice” (aka murder). But neither is there a “right,” to life.
Given that Vance will be charged to enforce the U.S. Constitution (which may, or may not, be an illegitimate, immoral, document), the federal government has NO authority to tell any State whom it will allow to be killed or not. Any more than the U.N. can.
But, in any event, there is no right to life. This is a matter of principle, not compromise.
No right to life? If there is no right to life, then we were wrong to try and execute the Nazi leadership after World War II. If there be no right to life, then it must be said that we live solely at the sufferance and pleasure of the state, which may blamelessly take our lives for any reason or for no reason at all. Our Declaration of Independence says there is an innate right to life which comes from God, but lest you say that the declaration is not legally authoritative, I’m sure that “You shall not commit murder” disposes of the question once and for all. Yes, there is indeed a God-given right to life, which persons and states violate at their own peril.
In point of fact (Fr Peter Morello PhD) the comparison is not perfectly apt between Kennedy/Cuomo and Trump/Vance, since while the former just coasted along in the stream of their increasing progressive party, Trump and Vance deliberately joined themselves to Richard Grenell, Peter Thiel, and the Log Cabiners and rowed against the established waters of their own party.
Indigo. During Trump’s first run and his presidency he was, as his traditional Catholic critics say, presenting himself as more prolife. Not much of a politician I looked Log Cabin politicians and it fits. Although I had taken for granted noting in previous comments that Trump was leaning more Left this time around for expediency and electability.
I’m not convinced Trump, a highly complex personality [many believe otherwise] is neutral regarding life issues and homosexuality. He’s a sort of ethical pragmatist who places winning as his first goal [the established Party doesn’t stand a chance of winning with its platform – the vast majority including virtually all Catholics are procontraception, proabortion to various degrees], who nevertheless is far more to the Right than it may appear. If elected he will move the country farther to the Right, much further than its woeful radicalism.
Inigo not Indigo [I fault Google auto correction].
Folks, I am an avid pro-lifer. I agree with what most of you said about Trump and Vance’ position on abortion and IVF. However, as I watched the video of Kamala Harris’ first interview last night and saw how dumb she really is, I fear for the safety of our country in the event of a nuclear threat under her. Cackling surely cannot score a point for the U.S. And so, Trump-Vance MAGA MAGA USA USA for me.
Vance, like Trump is an anomaly. Both have walkedback on abortion and IVF.
To be a Catholic takes hard work and much prayer. Vance argued. “Let the states figure out their own abortion policy.” Like Mario Cuomo, just a little abortion?
It is fruitless to expect a politician to keep all religion out.
He, like Trump, an immoral creature, compromise their faith and morals for the sake of political gain. Trump has made a decade-long impression by making degrading remarks about women, color, and anyone who has crossed his path. Vance: “Dem childless women are “cat ladies”. WOW! That should really get him the female vote.
I live next door to a cat lady Mr. Morgan and I’m not taking offense.
🙂
Seriously I think Mr Vance had a good point about EU leaders who make decisions about the future but have no descendants who will be affected by it.
Was Vance insulting the women, or their choices of men, over whom the women have chosen cats?
Kinda hard to tell sometimes…
The point about leadership who make decisions and aren’t affected by them has generally been true, even when the leadership have children. E.g. Ye olde pro-public-school politician who sends the kids to a private school. In this case I think Vance was also insulting them (or their available options) personally: can’t find anyone they think is fit to reproduce with, and who thinks they are.
Mrs. I wonder if John Donald Vance, who shows his true radical views, could label a celebate Nun a cat lady? I’m not sure who is the lesser of two evils. Trump or Vance?
As a military veteran I find Trump’s vial rhetoric is even more disgusting. His disparagement of our fallen heroes at Aisne-Marne American Cemetery in Paris and Arlington National Cemetery when he did not serve an hour in service to his country, feigning a bone spur to evader the Viet Nam draft is utterly appaling. We remember when he was interview by Chris Matthews on his view of John McCain’s being shot down and who spent painful months along with his crew at the Hanoi Hiltion. He was to return home, but he refused because his men were not included. Trump said “he was not a hero because he a loser who got caught”.
It has been said that Harris comes with a resum’e. Trump comes with a rap sheet.
“… who shows his true radical views …”
You mean his radical support for abortion, trans-mutilation, the destruction of cities, and … um, uh …? Never mind. I was thinking of the other VP candidate.
Still a choice of two party evils. One may be brought to Jesus, the other may be lost to history.
Fr. Chad Ripperger recent discussion two weeks ago on the situation when both presidential candidates/tickets promote or condone some form of objective evil(s): “The basic principle is in a situation like that, then your obligation is to vote for the lesser of two evils, and the reason being is because, in the lesser of two evils people say, ‘well, you’re voting for evil…’ No, you’re actually not…when you’re voting for a lesser evil you’re not voting for the person’s evil or for the evil that the thing is doing. What you’re voting for is to preserve the good that would be lost if the other opponent got in who’s more evil; or if the legislation got passed and which was actually even worse. So the point is– you’re voting to preserve the good and in that sense it’s a morally good act… and also it would be that if you don’t do that, then you may be responsible if a more evil person gets in because of a failure on your part to vote for the lesser of two evils… then it’s the sin of negligence because you’ve actually let somebody who’s more evil get in. So we have an obligation to vote to mitigate the evil and the damage it’s actually done.”
I think the good priest is wrong. Your obligation is to vote with a right conscience weighing the options in view of your (right) purposes. What he proposes would effectively but unnecessarily apply the faith to reduce the situation to a two-party race in all circumstances and everywhere in the Union.
Someone else was saying it’s politics not faith. It’s both and both have to be true. I think the Democrats are a total negative when it comes to the common good. Catholics should stress on this more, I agree with doing that. A party that has ridiculous approaches to the economy can’t balance the books with abortion crime.
If you then say the voter must haul with the Trump vote absolutely you then cancel the argument about the common good with the crime and the one about the crime itself.
I notice since pro-life has been urging its position, recently Trump has made some positive remarks about them as a de facto political force “pro-life”.
Abortion is not an option, it is crime. Regardless of who is accommodating it and regardless of the proposed placement of “cut-off point”. CRIME. You need to be telling that to people whether from your faith or your common sense and you are free to take liberties to stress on it that the consequences for defying it are not your fault or responsibility whether in faith or in common sense.
Trump is the one driving the guilt of those who join him.
Trump Responds to Pro-Life Pressure – article by Jonathon Van Maaren – First Things, Sept.2.