THERE IS NO CASTE SYSTEM IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

I am blessed to have some extremely pious, devoted and intelligent Catholic friends. One of them is Mary Hammond, whose recent Facebook post clearly articulates the Truth of a truly pro-life point of view that I have been trying to write but which has eluded me.

With her permission, I am copying her words here. Thank you, Mary, for letting me do this, and thank you for your heart-felt words.

Who Is Worthy?

When last October, Fr. Pavone answered my objection to Donald Trump's anti refugee and anti immigration stance with his view that American babies dying in American clinics should come before Syrian babies dying from bombings or drownings because abortion of the most vulnerable was the greatest evil, he unwittingly defined my entire objection to his brand of "pro life" and opened a new avenue for pro euthanasia advocates to follow.

Why? Because he created a "class" of persons set apart from the rest.

The Church does tell us we need to defend those who are most vulnerable, or the weakest. But in her wisdom she did not create classes of these and rank them for us. What does the Church say?

"CC 2274 Since it must be treated from conception as a person, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being."

Father Pavone and "the old guard pro life" have most of the sentence correct. It's that sticky last part he eliminates from the discussion: "like any other human being".

One of the concerns of anti euthanasia activists is that euthanasia will be used to clear out, if you will, those persons defined on a secular basis of being no longer able to contribute meaningfully to society. Which really means nothing more than they will not be working and paying taxes.

But secular aside, Catholics should be more concerned with the creation of classes in society by some pro life activists - the reason being is God does no such thing.

It is theologically incorrect to state that unborn children being aborted in America are deserving of more help and attention than unborn children being bombed or starved in Syria because abortion in the womb is worse than being bombed in the womb. Does God make these distinctions? No. Does the Church really, actually, make that distinction? No. Father Pavone makes that distinction and he is wrong.

And his view can also over take the anti euthanasia movement if supporters of Pavone's peculiar theology apply it to euthanasia.

God is not petty. He does not operate on some weird value system making one unborn child more deserving of help than another unborn child based on which type of unjust death they are dying.
One wonders if, in the March For Life, mothers holding signs really believe their born children are not as worthy of life defense as the unborn child. When pregnant, do mothers view their older children as less deserving of assistance than the child they are carrying?

Are older people with cancer more deserving of life defense than the 40 year old in a serious car accident and on life support? Secularists would say no. The 40 yr old might recover and go back to work. What would the old guard pro lifer say?

If we logically follow Fr. Pavone's thinking we can say Jesus was most deserving of love, care and attention before he was born and it was all downhill from there- He was no longer worthy of our attention.

His importance, His value, if you will, lessened when He reached an age where He could heal people and multiply loaves and fishes by Himself. Presumably Fr. Pavone would have found Christ adequately vulnerable and worthy of his attention when Christ was dying on the Cross. We won't know of course until he decides to comment fully on end of life issues.
But does God really think this way? I think we would be hard pressed to find any Christian faith of any denomination, much less the Catholic faith, who has such an insulting view of God or accuses God of such minimalist care.

Copyright (c) 2017 by Mary Hammond
Copied here with permission.

JUST RELAX

If someone points out a defect in your favorite political candidate, and you feel a violent reaction; if you feel like taking a baseball bat to their head or pouring a rain of insults all over them; take a deep breath, take a step back, and maybe take a walk. Do whatever will calm you. RESIST that urge to go nuts on your friend and destroy the friendship with ugly personal insults.

Realize that, for some reason, you feel identified with the candidate to the extent that you are willing to go all scorched earth in other areas of your life, and understand that something is out of balance because you've taken the bad news personally. You have to remember that you are not married to the candidate, and you have to respect that every one of your Christian brothers and sisters has to exercise their own conscience and prudential judgment, which may not comport with yours.

Discussion can be fruitful, if calm and reasoned. It is especially important to exchange facts for facts and to avoid attacking the character of the person whose political decisions are not the same as yours.

There is an erroneous strain of thought some have adopted that if you do not vote for the Republican Candidate, you are committing a horrible sin and should be denied communion. This is ridiculous. It does not represent the position of the Catholic Church.

Pope Benedict, when he was Cardinal Ratzinger, and the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, outlined the position of the Catholic Church, as follows:

"A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil,

and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion,

if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely

because of the candidate's permissive stand on abortion

and/or euthanasia. When a Catholic does not share a

candidate's permissive stand on abortion and/or

euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other

reasons, it is considered remote material

cooperation, which can be permitted in the

presence of proportionate reasons."

Cardinal Ratzinger, 

Prefect for the Congregation

for the doctrine of the faith

I would customarily be voting for a pro-life candidate, except that the Republican offering this year appears to be a crazy man, insecure, vengeful, with a fascist world view. He actually threatened to throw his competitor in jail, were he to win the prize of the presidency. He treats women, minorities and the disabled with contempt, publicly mocking them and calling them names. We've all heard the vulgar conversation between him and Billy Bush of Access Hollywood, wherein he bragged about assaulting women. He recently denied having actually assaulted anyone, calling his words "locker room talk," but there is ample evidence that he had a reputation for many years of actually having assaulted women. He trotted out 4 women with complaints against Bill Clinton (who is not running for office), making the EWW factor much worse, during the 2nd debate.

In addition, the fact checking organizations have blown apart most of his assertions, giving him a 73% to 76% score of lies. Satan is the father of lies, and, although I realize that many politicians are liars these days, the lies that Donald Trump dishes out are incendiary. They are calculated to inflame his "base," which appears to be a bunch of really angry people. He expressed admiration for Putin as a leader (he's a dictator), and he invited "Russia" to hack our computer systems.

Most telling is that Trump is no longer working within the framework of his supposed party, calling them names and tweeting angry rants at 3 in the morning. Many Republicans that previously endorsed him have rescinded their endorsements and are distancing themselves from him.

Hilary Clinton is almost certainly the next president, but, as one Republican political analyst recently opined, we will outlive Clinton. We know how to deal with Clinton. We have no idea how to handle Trump, if he COULD be handled at all. I envision him insulting world leaders and getting us into a nuclear war.

Trump's promise to install good justices just isn't enough to justify voting for the evil man he appears to be. The damage he will do far outweighs the slim chance that he will keep his promises in the pro-life area. Keep in mind, he promised to release his tax returns upon getting the nomination, and as soon as he was nominated, he refused and continues to refuse. He doesn't keep his promises, and he is hiding something, probably another lie.

So, that is my thinking on this season's political offerings.

ON THE OTHER HAND, I understand why some people might vote for him. Several of my friends are voting for him because they are hoping that he will keep his promise by installing pro-life justices to the supreme court and by working on overturning Roe v. Wade. I notice, however, that he rarely talks about the pro-life issues and, when he does, he has no fire in the belly for the cause. 

Another thing to consider...we have had many supposedly "pro-life" presidents in the past, and abortion is STILL legal. It appears that people like Trump use the promise of a pro-life position to expand their base. I just don't believe him. Some people are willing to take the chance, and that's OK. I won't be calling them names.

Most of all, I recommend that we ALL remember the promises of Christ. We know how this story ends, in the long run, and all we can do in the meantime is the best we can, given the circumstances in which we find ourselves, no matter how contradictory and crazy. Most important is that all Christians have to hang together and avoid tearing apart the body of Christ because of political differences.

Stay calm, people.

God bless,

Silver Rose Parnell