Sunday, November 30, 2008

I'll pass on reading this guy's letter telling me I need to go to confession for voting for 'that one'. Instead, I'll re-read "Rerum Novarum".

"If you are one of the 54 percent of Catholics who voted for a pro-abortion candidate, you were clear on his position and you knew the grav- ity of the question, I urge you to go to confession before receiving communion. Don't risk losing your state of grace by receiving sacrilegiously," says Father Joseph Illo, the pastor, at least for the time being, of St. Joseph's Catholic Church in Modesto, CA, in a homily earlier this month.

From the Modesto Bee:

The letter was sent to more than 15,000 members of the St. Joseph's parish. It is one of 34 parishes in the Stockton Diocese, which has more than 200,000 members in Stanislaus, San Joaquin and four other counties.

Illo also delivered this message in a homily.

Though Obama's support of abortion rights angered many Catholics nationally during the campaign, Illo's letter is believed to be the first in Central California from a priest to his parishioners on the topic.

The Most Rev. Stephen Blaire, bishop of the Stockton Diocese, disagrees with Illo. He said Catholics should not feel compelled to disclose how they voted to their priest.

Blaire said Catholics who carefully weighed many issues and settled on a candidate, such as Obama, who was supportive of abortion rights, were not in need of confession. He said confession would be necessary "only if someone voted for a pro-abortion or pro-choice candidate -- if that's the reason you voted for them."

"Our position on pro-life is very important, but there are other issues," Blaire said. "No one candidate reflects everything that we stand for. I'm sure that most Catholics who voted were voting on economic issues.

"There were probably many priests, and I suspect many bishops, who voted for Obama."

Father Illo had no comment on whether voting for a candidate because that candidate supports the torture of prisoners or the reduction of education to the needy or the ending of public health care or because a candidate opposes the tenets of the papal encyclical Rerum Novarum.* the voter runs the risk of losing the state of grace.

* Rerum Novarum is remarkable for its vivid depiction of the plight of the nineteenth-century urban poor and for its condemnation of unrestricted capitalism. Among the remedies it prescribed were the formation of trade unions and the introduction of collective bargaining, particularly as an alternative to state intervention. Rerum Novarum also recognized that the poor have a special status in consideration of social issues: the modern Catholic principle of the "preferential option for the poor" and the notion that God is on the side of the poor found their first expression in this document.


Anonymous said...

The concept that father illo made was about one of the ways that voting for obama could be a sin. For example: if we have the means to prevent a murder but instead we chose to solve some other issue that wasn't even close in importance, then that would be a serious sin. Like if we choose to ignore the killing of 4,000 humans each day so that we could have a president who we felt would help us keep our jobs. Suppose you or someone you love were one of the 4,000 humans to be killed. Wouldn't it be a sin for someone to vote to have u killed so that others might feel that they have a president that they think is better for the economy or some other reason the pales in comparison with the killing of 4,000 humans. Suppose it was 4,000 Jews or 4,000 Blacks, or perhaps the reintroduction of slavery. Catholic teaching is clear that abortion is evil and so that is a given for all Catholics. And so without a good reason, not to protect the the lives of other humans when they can would be a serious sin. All Catholic priests teach that abortion is a serious sin that would need to be confessed. Father Illo's teaching on all this is correct and would be worth the effort to try and understand it. Many people during the days of slavory didn't want to understand that it was wrong. I hope you'll try to understand on how voting for hitler or any candidate that says they will promote and ensure the mass murder of humans for no valid reason, could be a sin. There are spiritual consequences for us and those around us when we get things wrong. When we are wrong, we take others down with us, so seek the truth on this issue as well as the many issues out there. Hope this in some way helps you in your quest for the truth. If you ever change your mind, remember all the people that put Father Illo down on all this and then remember too, where you stood when he was fighting for the rights of the unborn and for the souls of all those who were misled.

Anonymous said...

Anon 12:09 AM: You say, "Like if we choose to ignore the killing of 4,000 humans each day."

How do you know that?

Anonymous said...

Anon: Well I don't know that and that's why i said "if". And Father Illo doesn't know either and thats why he used the word "if" and the word "consider". Only the person who voted knows if they knew that or not. I hope that helps.

Anonymous said...

Appears more than just Father Illo doesn't know what the 'if' they are talking about.

A total of 857,475 legal induced abortions were reported to CDC for 2000 from 49 reporting areas, representing a 0.5% decrease from the 861,789 legal induced abortions reported by 48 reporting areas for 1999 and a 1.3% decrease for the same 48 reporting areas that reported in 1999. The abortion ratio, defined as the number of abortions per 1,000 live births, was 246 in 2000 (for the same 48 reporting areas as 1999), compared with 256 reported for 1999. This represents a 3.8% decline in the abortion ratio. The abortion rate (for the same 48 reporting areas as 1999) was 16 per 1,000 women aged 15--44 years for 2000. This was also a 3.8% decrease from the rate reported for procedures performed during 1997--1999 for the same 48 reporting areas.

Anonymous said...

Although induced abortions usually result from unintended pregnancies, which often occur despite the use of contraception, the approximately 4.6 million women who have had intercourse during the 3 months preceding the survey but were not using contraception might be the most at risk for unintended pregnancy (16). Thus, a reduction in the number of abortions will require adapting complex strategies. Insurance coverage of reversible contraception has increased substantially since 1993 (68), although gaps in coverage remain substantial. Education regarding abstinence and contraceptive use, including emergency contraception, combined with access to and education regarding safe, effective contraception and family planning services, might help reduce the incidence of unintended pregnancy and, therefore, the number of legal induced abortions in the United States