www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall John Kerry & Latin Legalism

Okay, Francis: I've got a real quandry for you then...

A very good friend of mine had to have, what was technically termed, an "abortion". During an ultrasound, it was discovered that the fetus had formed without a complete spinal cord. The baby had a heartbeat, no brain activity, never would have survived outside the womb and would probably never be carried to term in the doctor's opinion.

My friend made the very agonizing decision to end the pregnancy. It was very difficult for her since she and her husband had tried for 3 years to get pregnant. To this day, she cries because of it.

I don't consider her to be a sinner. God may think otherwise, but that is for Him to judge, not me.

I cry for the babies who are killed because they are "incoveniences". Personally, I do believe that a woman has the right to choose... the right to choose NOT to have sex with any man she doesn't want to marry and have a baby with.

Personally, I shudder to think of the trauma (both physical and emotional) that my friend would have had to endure if she could not have ended her pregnancy. I believe that her unborn child has a special place in heaven with God.

As for the John Kerry thing... it's exactly this kind of situation that leaves my husband with a bad taste in his mouth for "organized religions". When the bishops say "it's wrong" and then turn around and ignore their own words only convices people (like my hubby) that they are more interested in politics than in the saving of souls.

As I heard on the radio here in SC: "If Kerry gets elected, we will be referring to the White House as "The Waffle House".

There's a good reason this man flip-flops so much.

I also had a good friend in a very similar situation. She was told early in the pregnancy that the child would live for at most for a couple of hours after birth. They knew the great worth of every child, and the mother carried the child to term. Sure enough, the baby girl died an hour or so after birth. My friend went through nine months of pregnancy and the emotional trauma of knowing this child would die, and she had to watch the child die in her hands soon after the trauma of childbirth.

Do you know what? My friend, while sad, was still very thankful to God for the beautiful gift of Cecilia (the child's name). She knows that she received many blessings from God in the short lifespan of her daughter. We are not called to question why God gives us the gifts that He does - we are to appreciate them for what they are. I do not think Cecilia has any less "value" than I do or any child created by God.

This will sound very callous of me in a forum like this (where you can't see facial expressions and don't have a chance to fully explain something) - but our Lord never said that the Christian life was an easy one. I don't doubt that your friend would have suffered greatly. But that does not affect the value of the life that God created in her. We have no idea what He had in store for the child, or how the child could have been a blessing to the family.

Where do we draw the line? If it is okay in this situation to abort a baby, is it okay if it is a Down's Syndrome child? Every child is a gift from God, and we need to always look at them as such.

Regarding whether your friend is a sinner - of course she is; we all are. But God sees all of our actions and knows our hearts - He is the only one to judge.

Alex,

My dear friend, I'm really struggling with this issue right now. Thank you for bringing it up.

The past several months have been very difficult for me, because of the situation at my parish. You see, every week after Divine Liturgy the parishioners gather for coffee and discussion in the church hall, and some of us go out for lunch. During these times, political discussion is on a lot of people's minds, and inevitably becomes the topic of discussion.

As far as I can tell, my wife and I are the ONLY members of our parish who are not supporting John Kerry. If there are others, they aren't speaking up.

I am not a fan of either political party, and I try to keep out of political debates. But I do feel very strongly that the abortion issue must be addressed, and I cannot in good conscience support pro-abortion candidates, especially someone as enthusiastically pro-abortion as Senator Kerry. I have tried repeatedly to raise this concern with the members of my parish, but most of them (with a few exceptions) don't believe that the issue of abortion is important enough to factor into their voting.

Two weeks ago one gentleman in my parish, who is a very prominent pillar in the parish and does much good service work, explained to me that it is too simplistic to equate being pro-choice with being pro-abortion. He explained that being pro-choice is "about letting people have options." I was so saddened by this that I didn't even bother responding, and just listened.

Alex, as far as I can tell, I belong to an effectively pro-choice parish. This saddens me beyong belief. Sure, there are some people who will tell you that they are pro-life, but it doesn't factor into which politicians they support. If the truth be told, most of them will support whoever the Democratic nominee is, no matter what his positions are.

This is the real crux of the issue. We inherit our political affiliations from our parents, just like most of us inherit our religions. I come from a long line of died in the wool Democrats. My grandfather was a local party leader, and my cousin/godfather still is. But I cannot in good conscience support a pro-abortion politician just because he is a Democrat. Every fiber of my being screams against this.

I really wish that the Catholics in my parish, who are for the most part good and caring people, would realize the great injustice of abortion and take a stand against it. But continuing to suppport pro-abortion candidates simply because they are Democrats is deeply unfortunate, and makes one complicit in the injustice.

Until then, every week I must sit patiently and listen to their enthusiastic support for Senator Kerry. As I pull into the church parking lot to worship God, I have to look at their "Kerry for President" bumperstickers. A couple of months ago I was literally corned against the wall by an angry parishioner who wanted to know how I could stand by and let Bush win reelection.

Honestly, I am beginning to wonder if I am in the right Church. Maybe I should leave? If my parish, as a whole, isn't concerned with the terrible injustice of abortion, maybe I don't belong there. I used to be zealous to see my parish grow and flourish. Now I am ambivilant. If it closes down in ten years, at this point I don't care. It is safe to say that I am disillusioned.

Anthony

P.S. Here are some images worth pondering

[Linked Image]

[Linked Image]

[Linked Image]

Anthony,

I often feel the same as you, but please have hope!!! The idea of Catholic=Democrat in this country is very strong, and unfortunate. (It doesn't equal "Republican" either, of course).

I really think it often comes down to what party we "inherited". In my case, my mother was a Democrat growing up and my father a Republican. Now my mother is a Republican and my father a Democrat! So you can see I only inherited a confused outlook on life. But it seems to me that many, especially a high percentage of eastern Catholics, follow the Democrat party without question. I don't think they really see what abortion truly is; it is just another "political issue" for them. This is tragic.

If I am not mistaken, you have the wonderful web-site east2west.org, which does a great job of explaining the riches of the eastern traditions to us "Latins". I have used it often to help me explain to my Roman Catholic friends the beauty and richness of the Eastern traditions. However, if I may say so, the eastern Catholic churches in this country are still very tied to specific cultures, which in turn for historical reasons are tied to a specific political party - the Democrats. Roman Catholic parishes are not so tied down any more. 30 years ago, I'm sure the percentage of Democrats in a Roman Catholic parish would be much higher than today. But the percentage might not have changed at all in an Eastern Catholic parish in America.

But I do think this is changing. Very few people my age (33) and younger are wedded to a political party. Some of this is due to apathy, but some of it is due to the fact that neither party represents an inspiring view for our nation. As Catholics become less attached to parties, my hope is that they will begin to vote based on a candidate's position as it relates to Church teaching. As you evangelize and bring more people into your parish, I think some of the (negative) cultural ties will be broken (while hopefully maintaining the positive ones).

God Bless!

Anthony- that is indeed troubling. Our pastor preaches regularly on the evil of abortion, what is your pastor doing?
I too feel alienated from both parties, being critical of big business AND big government, generally antiwar AND prolife and so on. But I think voting for a proabortion candidate is beyond the pale...have you talked with your pastor about this? Perhaps he is unaware. If he's also a Kerry supporter you should perhaps find another parish; that can't be too hard in NW Pennsylvania, the holy land of the ECs. That does not at all mean one must support Bush, there are plenty of reasons not to, but Kerry? Unreal. If this is typical of Byzantine parishes we have bigger problems than the esoteric minutiae discussed here on the forum!

If you'd like to answer my questions to Francis, please do Anthony.

Let's be clear. Did a vote for Bush in the last election preoduce a change in the numbers of abortions, or is that number actually indepdendent of that vote. If the latter, itis unfair and extremely uncharitable to make a charge of complicty.

The number of innocent casualties of warfare can far more relably be estimated to have gone up. Are Bush voters (who heard a candidate eschew natio-building and advocate a more humbel foreign policy - talk about substantive flip-flop!) complicit in those deaths?

Dear Anthony:

From the bottom of my heart, I thank you for sharing with us your own anguish over some people's equivocal interpretation on the realistic meaning, and consequences, of being "pro choice!"

It is not an option; it is a veiled intent to commit, in my mind, an unforgivable murder of an innocent and defenseless unborn child.

Human life begins at the moment of conception!

Amado

This issue with Kerry reminds me of the issue many traditional Orthodox had with Michael Dukakis in 1988.It wasn't so much that he was pro-"choice"(he probably was/is),but that he was married to a Jewish woman, and therefore not eligable to recieve Communion.A Greek priest, when asked about this,replied"Dukakis? He is not running for Patriarch, he is not running for Bishop, he is running for President."

You bring up legitimate political questions. Fighting against the culture of death in our society does involve the need to make prudential judgements at times.

I've heard the arguments like this and "the number of abortions went down with Clinton; you don't need a 'pro-life' president to reduce the number of abortions". But this argument rings hollow. If David Duke were elected, but his economic policies ended up helping African Americans - was it okay to vote for David Duke? Personally, I don't think so. Quite honestly, John Kerry's position when it comes to abortion is as offensive to a Catholic as David Duke's views on race relations is to an African American.

I make no claims that Bush is a great warrior for the pro-life cause. If there were another anti-abortion candidate, I would consider that person. However, Bush at least has not used his bully pulpit to promote the unrelenting murder of the unborn - something Kerry has already done, and will continue to do if President.

Christ is Risen!
Truly He is Risen!

And more shame to those who said so! And to he who "remembered" to be Greek when it suited him for votes. He was never Orthodox, in the sense of believing in the Orthodox faith. Were he so, then he would never have been able to do and say what he did. But people, including GOA priests, are often blinded by ethnicity, and by politics.

Anthony, Thank you for sharing your thoughts...as they often reflect my own inability to believe what goes on in the heads of those who say they are members of the Church, and yet have no problem PROUDLY supporting those who stand in sharp contrast to the values and teachings of that Church!

Gaudior, remembering 1988 all too well

The problem I have with John Kerry's pro-choice position is not just that position per se, but the fact that he refuses to acknowledge that he is in any way at odds with the official teaching of the Church. He's even stated that he doesn't think the bishops or the Pope have any right to "tell other people what to believe".

And here I've been working under the assumption that they not only have that right, but that obligation. Silly me!

That is why he wants you to listen to him instead.

Hi, djs,

To vote for candidates who pledge to make abortion more available IS to be complicit in their sin.

The agenda of the Damnocratic party has long been taxpayer-funded abortion on demand.

Arlen Specter and other Repubs also support it.

The long and the short of it is that any man (or woman) who defends the murder of innocents is unfit to hold public office of any kind. Pro-"choice" politicians fall into this category. If you are of the opinion that Bush's wars are unjust then maybe, for you, he would fall into this category as well. Fine. But it is NOT a choice between supporting abortion and supporting unjust war. I myself intend to vote either for the Constitution Party candidate or someone else who has a semblance of grasp on reality.

By the way, Mr. Dragani, I commend your heroism in your parish. Tell your "pillar" friend that I have been a sidewalk counselor for a long time and I know damn well that the abortion industry has NOTHING TO DO WITH "CHOICE" or "OPTIONS". They deliberately target vulnerable young girls, first with sex ed, then with abortions, all the while CONCEALING INFORMATION THAT MIGHT DISSUADE THEM, UNTIL IT IS TOO LATE. I have seen the "clinic escorts" harass and physically assault pro-life counselors in order to make the girls' "choice" so much easier. I have seen the recruiters that PP sends into minority neighborhoods to find pregnant girls and bring them back to the mill.

I hate it when they talk about "choice", because the industry is about PREVENTING girls from making an informed choice not to murder their child.

LatinTrad

First we belive just what John 6 says, the Eucharist is the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. Each time John Kerrry or anyone else who takes communion and they think that abortion is fine, can be and very possibly are condeming their soul. Here is an example made of then Gov. Grey Davis:
Bishop Wiegand strongly defended Msgr. Kavanagh saying :"In December, Monsignor confronted Governor Gray Davis about his support of abortion and challenged him to examine his conscience. I applaud Monsignor Kavanagh for his strong and consistent witness. People need to understand that you cannot call yourself a Catholic in good standing and at the same time publicly hold views that are contradictory to the Catholic faith. Thank you, Monsignor Kavanagh, for standing up for the unborn, for your dedication to truth and for your pastoral concern for souls, including the Governor's." He then went on to say, "As your bishop, I have to say clearly that anyone " politician or otherwise " who thinks it is acceptable for a Catholic to be pro-abortion is in very great error, puts his or her soul at risk, and is not in good standing with the Church. Such a person should have the integrity to acknowledge this and choose of his own volition to abstain from receiving Holy Communion until he has a change of heart."

Also,

I have heard that Kerry was only in Vietnam for four months...is there any truth to that?

Pani Rose

I think that there are several issues here.

First the ghastly sinfulness of abortion itself, which I don't think any Catholic disputes.

Second the equivalence, for lack of a better word, of those born and those not yet born. ISTM that this equivalence is not obvious: do we have, in any culture, simiar funeral rites in instances of spontaneous abortion versus born persons? do we grieve similarly? do seriously religious people (e.g., Jews) have different opinions on this point? Do we regard violence against abortion providers as justified as intervening to prevent violence against a born person?

Our Catholic faith responds to this question with a beautiful affirmation of life: it instructs us to answer this question of equivalence with a resounding yes! Amen! This is a non-intuitive teaching, but seems to have enormous traction. Look at how much greater moral clarity is evidenced by the younger Catholics, who grew up with clear catechesis on this issue, than those old pillars. I am only sad that this clarity seems to have very little charity and understanding attached to it.

Finally, there is a political issue. What is the best way to get from here and now, to a society in which abortion is unthinkable - within our political structure (or not?). IMO, given the mix of views in our society on issue two, the idea of a Government dictate on the subject is unworkable. I think that only in a society where born life is truly cherished - where indivualization of poverty, illness, ignorance, etc. are unthinkable - will it be possible also for pre-born life to be truly cherished and abortion unthinkable. This view governs my voting habits.

The shortest distance between two points in politics is rarely a straight line. Maybe this is what the old pillars are understanding.