Kerry Comes To Chillicothe
Presidential candidate John Kerry has visited Chillicothe, Ohio and attended mass at St. Mary Parish there, with Fr. Lawrence Hummer officiating. Kerry attended a private Mass. Interestingly, about the time Kerry attended Mass, I was at confession in my own parish.
Had I been invited to this private Mass, I certainly wouldn’t have been among the hundreds of screaming Kerry supporters, as I am not a "screaming supporter" of either presidential candidate, as many of my blog readers know (I really hope those 200 screamers weren’t all Catholics). In fact, I probably would have been primarily distracted and bothered by Kerry’s presence at Mass. I think Fr. Hummer made some good points about there being other issues in the election, such as George Bush’s unjust Iraq War, that Catholics must consider when voting. However, I became disappointed with his "win will you" comment, a subtle endorsement of Kerry, because Kerry would likely appoint Supreme Court justices who would clearly expand abortion rights and move toward the legalization of gay marriage. And we must remember that according to Catholic teaching, life issues such as abortion take precedent over other issues when choosing a candidate, even if the other issues are still important.
Had I been there, I would have liked the chance to have encouraged Kerry to follow the Church’s teaching on major moral issues, and tell him that if he were to switch his position on certain moral issues, many other young Catholics and I would vote for him in a heartbeat. (Honestly, I will just be glad when this election is over, because no matter who wins, I think America loses.)
October 16th, 2004 at 8:45 pm
I would like to “encourage” Kerry to follow the Church’s teaching too — although I think that considering his views, it would likely not be prudent for me to get close to him.
October 17th, 2004 at 10:26 am
Maria,
…and John Kerry probably thought Canadians would be the least of his problems ;). He didn’t count on Canadian Catholics!
October 18th, 2004 at 2:42 pm
I don’t see why Kerry’s Catholic beliefs should influence his stances on Gay marriage or abortion. We do not live in a Christian country, we live in a secular one. religion is meant to be part of the individual, not of the government. Since, scientifically, there is no support for the idea of a soul or a non-viable human being, to legistlate such and idea would be a violation of the first amendment. And with gay marriage, marriage, in the eyes of the government, should be nothing more than a public profession of love and commitment, and a contract between two people. Allowing gays to have the same rights you and I enjoy does nothing to harm anyone. They’re not going to be lining up at St. Mary’s or St. Peters to get married (I used to live in Chillicothe too). Isn’t the fundamental message of Jesus to love your neighbor and not discriminate?
October 20th, 2004 at 12:03 pm
No, Patrick, Jesus’ “fundamental message” is NOT to “love your neighbor and not discriminate”. Rather it is “to love the Lord your God with all of your heart, mind, soul and strength” and “your neighbor as yourself”. This is the summary of the Law of God.
Loving God means keeping his commands regardless of where you are or what you do. Loving others as yourself means watching out and caring for them as much as you would care for your own person. I don’t see how people who have committed themselves to a life devoted to God could or should be asked to put that on the backburner while they carry out their duties. By your definition an athiest in the government would have to legislate according to religious morality because he or she serves a population (a majority, I might add) of religious people.
Christians simply cannot isolate their faith from everything else. It is part of every action they do and idea they think.
As to your statement that “[a]llowing gays to have the same rights you and I enjoy does nothing to harm anyone.”, you are wrong on two assumptions. First, homosexuals DO enjoy the same rights. . .the rights of any single person in an ongoing relationship that is not marriage. Second, several people are harmed by “gay marriage”, not the least are the two people immediately involved who are in danger of their souls. After that you can include children who see the public behavior of these two individuals and become confused over the sanctity of marriage; the possible spouses of these individuals who will be divorced and left to deal with the aftermath of a marriage that disolved; a society who will be pulled into a cycle of more and more financial benefits to an ever increasing number of people who feel entitled to them simply because they want them, ect.
Harm no one? I think the question is, “who doesn’t it harm?”