Jump to content
An Old School Catholic Message Board

Should Faithful Catholics Be Affiliated With Parties?


HereticHunter10

Recommended Posts

The suggestion I came up with thanks to some friends here a while back:

[b]C[/b]atholics [b]R[/b]esenting [b]A[/b]merican [b]P[/b]olitics.

We have a Facebook group and everything...:mellow:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saint Therese

[quote name='MissyP89' post='1682307' date='Oct 20 2008, 11:33 PM']The suggestion I came up with thanks to some friends here a while back:

[b]C[/b]atholics [b]R[/b]esenting [b]A[/b]merican [b]P[/b]olitics.

We have a Facebook group and everything...:mellow:[/quote]
:lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think any party based on Catholic principles, while really cool, would be pretty much doomed to failure in the election-winning-sense.

Christian ideals are pretty much the opposite of popular. By definition.

I'm not really a fan of democracy, but I guess we're stuck with it for now. I think we might be best off trying to influence the parties we've got. I don't think a successful political party can be anything but a collection of shared interests, most of which are evil.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saint Therese

[quote name='philothea' post='1682330' date='Oct 20 2008, 11:41 PM']I think any party based on Catholic principles, while really cool, would be pretty much doomed to failure in the election-winning-sense.

Christian ideals are pretty much the opposite of popular. By definition.

I'm not really a fan of democracy, but I guess we're stuck with it for now. I think we might be best off trying to influence the parties we've got. I don't think a successful political party can be anything but a collection of shared interests, most of which are evil.[/quote]
For now, soon to be on the way to totalitarianism. Very soon, I'd say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='philothea' post='1682330' date='Oct 20 2008, 11:41 PM']I think any party based on Catholic principles, while really cool, would be pretty much doomed to failure in the election-winning-sense.

Christian ideals are pretty much the opposite of popular. By definition.

I'm not really a fan of democracy, but I guess we're stuck with it for now. I think we might be best off trying to influence the parties we've got. I don't think a successful political party can be anything but a collection of shared interests, most of which are evil.[/quote]
Back in the day,the catholic vote was what was sought after,the difference between winning and losing. It has only become "unpopular" after vatican two and the misinterpetation of what"a new springtime" meant to preists who sought after the approval of birth control. When this great event took place and our Holy Father put his Holy foot down on the matter. Silent and not so silent dissenters hit the church, and hit it hard they did. This fractioned us at a pivitol point in time, this tossing out the baby with the bath water,so to say (no pun intended). Abortion is now birth controls favored back up. Re-edgumacatin' young catholic's with a bunch of useless garbage. Whatever happened to teaching us the faith? (leaving soap box)
This is where your social issues come in. Some where along the way we put infanticide by the way side, because there are needy people out there that we have to take care of.
See, babies are disposable now, Hey but we can be like God,yet again, Gee that apple just wasn't good enough. With this lovely magic pill that will free women up from the bitter slavery of men,our families and our homes (or did this move enslave us further?...huh? dig deep?) With the fabric of society decaying now,.. What to do????
Got some simple news for you,those needy people will always be here, a new soul, that God gives us, won't be, if the mother chooses it. Harsh??? Try reading the bible. The poor will always be among us it says,...therefore it is OUR duty to care for them. Since when did it get to be the Governments job to create people dependant on the govenment to live??? What is more Loving??? Feeding them or teaching them how to grow the food for themselves???? What would YOU say is more Loving????...and mind you, how do you do that if you have fewer resources yourselves through heavy taxation?? YOU are to to the spreader of YOUR own hard earned wealth to the needy in YOUR communities and YOU are the one to choose with YOUR own money who and what social programs YOU want to support. I do not want to support groups that do not coinside with my principles. Acorn,Abortion etc.

The more Goverment provides,the more it has control over all of our lives. The more we grow into mindless robots because someone else has the remote. I want God to have my remote,not the government. Greed and politics mix like a martini,don't put the cherry in it by condoning both sides as having strong catholic values. They don't. Life is the affirmation of God's love for us. Without life we become a selfish society. Look at the damage of Abortion thus far.....Maybe just maybe our country deserves Obama.... Maybe the most loving thing is to let us sink so we see what is important.?????

Edited by jckinsman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

kenrockthefirst

[quote name='HereticHunter10' post='1682179' date='Oct 20 2008, 10:03 PM']I bring up this issue, not because I'm an independent (FYI: I plan to vote for John McCain).

I bring up this issue because it is one I think faithful Catholics, who believe that ALL the Chruch's Social Teachings should be upheld and acted upon, sometimes struggle with. I know I see it with the Catholics I socialized with (and I go to Catholic HS).

When you look at the two major parties in the US and their platforms, neither party has social issues in its platform. Meaning the Democratic Party does not stand for abortion and gay rights, rather Democratic Politicians stand for abortion and gay rights. Same with the Republicans, the Republican party is not pro life and pro family but GOP politicians are.

So, each party is made up of ideals on how to govern. Democrats prefer the use of government to provide stability to the working class generally. Republicans believe that when the government stays out of the lives of its citizens, all benefit; lower, middle, and upper class citizens.

So based on Catholic ideology and the parties ideology, a solid case can be made for both.

Example: The Church believes that governments should make it so that healthcare should be afforded to all---similar to the idea of universal healthcare, a traditionally liberal or Democratic ideal.

Also: The Church believes in the participation of all in the community, society, business place, so that all can succeed with out limits by governments. This is similar to the GOP or conservative ideal that ALL benefit when governments stay out of business and let the people participate with themselves, by themselves.

I could go on with many issues but I think you guys get the point.

Social issues aside, if this is the case, that Catholic teachings have merits in both parties, how is it possible that faithful Catholics can say that this issue is more important than that issue? Aren't all of equal significance? How is healthcare not as important as immigration reform according to Church teaching?

Catholics can be seen as liberal sometimes and conservative other times if they believe and act on Church Social Teaching.

So why belong to a party that is only one of those (conservative of liberal)? Is it, maybe, in some way wrong to belong to a party that is just conservative on all issues if you are liberal on some, and vice versa?

Shouldn't Catholics promote having an NPA on their voter card for what it symbolizes?

If not, then why not start, maybe, a Catholic political party. (Ex: America's Catholic Party)

A party that actually includes social issues like cap punishment and abortion in its platform. A party that is liberal on immigration and healthcare but conservative on gay marriages and education. A party where all Faithful Catholics can be a part of and endorse fully.

Any comments? Questions?[/quote]
:yes:

I've been *trying* to say something along similar lines for a while now, albeit unsuccessfully. Republicans ≠ Catholic. Indeed, in several instances, Republican policy is antithetical to Catholic teaching. I think that a party that was explicitly called The American Catholic Party or, at the very least, a party implicitly informed by Catholic teaching, would be great. If it wasn't *explicitly* called a "Catholic" party but was clear about the source of its policies, others who weren't Catholic but who were on board with the party's policies could feel comfortable being part of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think something went wrong in the transmission of my comment. :unsure:

[quote name='jckinsman' post='1682550' date='Oct 21 2008, 04:30 AM']Back in the day,the catholic vote was what was sought after,the difference between winning and losing.[/quote]

I think this is still the case. I think it's why Bush won the election twice. Unfortunately, he has done enough offensive/stupid/irresponsible/immoral things that many conservatives (and possibly Catholics) can't bring themselves to support his party again. I don't say it's right, but I think it's happened.

[quote name='jckinsman' post='1682550' date='Oct 21 2008, 04:30 AM']It has only become "unpopular" after vatican two and the misinterpetation of what"a new springtime" meant to preists who sought after the approval of birth control. When this great event took place and our Holy Father put his Holy foot down on the matter. Silent and not so silent dissenters hit the church, and hit it hard they did. This fractioned us at a pivitol point in time, this tossing out the baby with the bath water,so to say (no pun intended). Abortion is now birth controls favored back up. Re-edgumacatin' young catholic's with a bunch of useless garbage. Whatever happened to teaching us the faith? (leaving soap box)
This is where your social issues come in. Some where along the way we put infanticide by the way side, because there are needy people out there that we have to take care of.
See, babies are disposable now, Hey but we can be like God,yet again, Gee that apple just wasn't good enough. With this lovely magic pill that will free women up from the bitter slavery of men,our families and our homes (or did this move enslave us further?...huh? dig deep?) With the fabric of society decaying now,.. What to do????
Got some simple news for you,those needy people will always be here, a new soul, that God gives us, won't be, if the mother chooses it. Harsh??? Try reading the bible. The poor will always be among us it says,...therefore it is OUR duty to care for them. Since when did it get to be the Governments job to create people dependant on the govenment to live??? What is more Loving??? Feeding them or teaching them how to grow the food for themselves???? What would YOU say is more Loving????...and mind you, how do you do that if you have fewer resources yourselves through heavy taxation?? YOU are to to the spreader of YOUR own hard earned wealth to the needy in YOUR communities and YOU are the one to choose with YOUR own money who and what social programs YOU want to support. I do not want to support groups that do not coinside with my principles. Acorn,Abortion etc.

The more Goverment provides,the more it has control over all of our lives. The more we grow into mindless robots because someone else has the remote. I want God to have my remote,not the government. Greed and politics mix like a martini,don't put the cherry in it by condoning both sides as having strong catholic values. They don't. Life is the affirmation of God's love for us. Without life we become a selfish society. Look at the damage of Abortion thus far.....Maybe just maybe our country deserves Obama.... Maybe the most loving thing is to let us sink so we see what is important.?????[/quote]

:unsure:

What I was trying to say, is that regardless of this particular election, or even this particular country, Christian principles are based on things that are inherently unpopular. Telling people to be virtuous, deny themselves, give to the poor, work hard, be humble, be merciful, love their neighbor, do good even if they expect nothing back... these things will not win votes. Not that they [i]shouldn't[/i] if people were wise, but generally, in most societies, throughout most of time, they would not.

Ordinary, foolish people vote for their own selfish interests. They want more money, they want easier work, they want their own special concerns promoted, and they want people who are different from them restricted.

So, turning our Catholic principles into the guiding force of a political party -- when the purpose of a political party is to be popular and get votes -- seems at odds with the intent of those virtues, and doomed to failure. Yes, it could be done, and yes, good Catholics would support such a party. But, we would withdraw our civilizing influence from the two major morally-weak parties while gaining nothing except, perhaps, the ability to feel good about ourselves.

I don't like democracy, and I don't like the two-party system, but without changing [i]that[/i], I think that in the USA, the most effective promotion of our values comes through supporting whatever party most fully represents us. I don't think Republicans would have a stance against abortion at all in their platform if it weren't for Catholics and others like us. If we told Republicans we weren't going to vote for them, would they even bother?

I am all for Catholic coalitions, and think tanks and such. We should strive for as much influence as possible. But not for a discrete political Catholic party, all of its own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

kenrockthefirst

[quote name='philothea' post='1682618' date='Oct 21 2008, 12:44 PM']I don't think Republicans would have a stance against abortion at all in their platform if it weren't for Catholics and others like us. If we told Republicans we weren't going to vote for them, would they even bother?[/quote]
This is the point. Republicans play pro-life and "family values" voters like a fiddle, and then do squat in return. Yes, yes, Bush has tinkered around the edges on the abortion issue but it what meaningful way has the Republican party remotely addressed the full spectrum of issues that should be of concern to us as Catholics? We as individuals and as the Church are called to salt and light. In a society in which we can participate in electoral politics, why *shouldn't* we have a political party that explicitly espouses Church teaching as policy positions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='kenrockthefirst' post='1682624' date='Oct 21 2008, 02:01 PM']This is the point. Republicans play pro-life and "family values" voters like a fiddle, and then do squat in return. Yes, yes, Bush has tinkered around the edges on the abortion issue but it what meaningful way has the Republican party remotely addressed the full spectrum of issues that should be of concern to us as Catholics? We as individuals and as the Church are called to salt and light. In a society in which we can participate in electoral politics, why *shouldn't* we have a political party that explicitly espouses Church teaching as policy positions?[/quote]
Well, what would be the effect?

Let's say you could get every Church-going Catholic to join the American Catholic Party, and vote accordingly. (I don't think you can assume that people that won't even go to mass will follow a political lead.)

Adult Catholics are 22% of the US population. 36% of those attend mass regularly. That's about 8% of the population, if I do my math right.

Now that is a lot of people. It's enough to influence the outcome of an election that's got ~10% undecided voters, but no where near enough to get any major candidate elected. We might be able to get one representative into to one seat, on occasion, for a term, when a dominant party has a scandal or something. But we couldn't touch major political parties or national policies at all.

Now, if the USA had a parliamentary system, THEN it would make all kinds of sense to have a Catholic party. But with a two-party system? We'd just be locking ourselves into powerless obscurity.

(And I say this with loathing and disdain for both major parties, and plans of my own to vote third party.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

kenrockthefirst

[quote name='philothea' post='1682652' date='Oct 21 2008, 02:49 PM']Now, if the USA had a parliamentary system, THEN it would make all kinds of sense to have a Catholic party.[/quote]
That's what I'M talking about!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

eagle_eye222001

[quote name='philothea' post='1682652' date='Oct 21 2008, 02:49 PM']Well, what would be the effect?

Let's say you could get every Church-going Catholic to join the American Catholic Party, and vote accordingly. (I don't think you can assume that people that won't even go to mass will follow a political lead.)

Adult Catholics are 22% of the US population. 36% of those attend mass regularly. That's about 8% of the population, if I do my math right.

Now that is a lot of people. It's enough to influence the outcome of an election that's got ~10% undecided voters, but no where near enough to get any major candidate elected. We might be able to get one representative into to one seat, on occasion, for a term, when a dominant party has a scandal or something. But we couldn't touch major political parties or national policies at all.

Now, if the USA had a parliamentary system, THEN it would make all kinds of sense to have a Catholic party. But with a two-party system? We'd just be locking ourselves into powerless obscurity.

(And I say this with loathing and disdain for both major parties, and plans of my own to vote third party.)[/quote]

Exactly.

Not to mention that the Catholics supporting the Catholic party have left one of the two big parties which means you will potentially allow one of the bigger political parties to gain a bigger advantage. I don't think you would take an equal number of Catholics from both parties.

I think it is much better the way the Vatican teaches how we should vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='kenrockthefirst' post='1682661' date='Oct 21 2008, 02:58 PM']That's what I'M talking about![/quote]
Well.

Okay, but...

That would require overthrowing the government and writing an entirely new constitution.

:sweat:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

kenrockthefirst

[quote name='philothea' post='1682683' date='Oct 21 2008, 02:25 PM']Well.

Okay, but...

That would require overthrowing the government and writing an entirely new constitution.

:sweat:[/quote]
You say that like it's a bad thing. :saint:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='kenrockthefirst' post='1682624' date='Oct 21 2008, 02:01 PM']This is the point. [b] Republicans play pro-life and "family values" voters like a fiddle, and then do squat in return[/b]. Yes, yes, Bush has tinkered around the edges on the abortion issue but it what meaningful way has the Republican party remotely addressed the full spectrum of issues that should be of concern to us as Catholics? We as individuals and as the Church are called to salt and light. In a society in which we can participate in electoral politics, why *shouldn't* we have a political party that explicitly espouses Church teaching as policy positions?[/quote]
I have to completely disagree with that. They have taken a stand the democrats fear to take. They have taken the pro-life stand even at times when it isn't so popular. That counts for something. In regards to tangible pro-life works, the party has made enormous strides for the pro-life movement.

Bush has not been as vocal or as proficient of a speaker as Reagan on pro-life issues, but he has taken enacted more pro-life legislation. If it wasn't for him, the gravity of this election for the pro-life movement would not be nearly as great as it is. The bishops know this. That's why they are being so vocal. With the Supreme Court and many Bush pro-life accomplishments at stake, they know this election will be a big win or a big loss for the pro-life movement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HereticHunter10

The American Catholic Party would not have to be as big as the two parties to begin with. It can start small, at the county and state level.

Maybe get one on some county's commission, another in a state's house of reps. or senate, another maybe in the US Congress from a district where Faithful Catholics are a large demographic.

Think nationally, act locally. That is what true Grassroots politics is about.

Also in concern about providing a broader label to include non Catholics as well...

Why not the Citizens' Christian Party? Or something like that...

While we include non Catholics, Catholics would be our prominent party members and it will be obvious that our party's platform comes from Magisterium Teaching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...