Cardinal “Night-night baby” Tobin gives a thumbs up to the Weekend at Joey’s campaign:
Cardinal Joseph Tobin, who supports homosexuality, stated that Catholics in “good conscience” could vote for pro-abortion Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden. Tobin’s de facto endorsement, where he mentioned Biden by name, contradicts the country’s top pro-life priests who have warned that “no Catholic can vote for Joe Biden” because of his radical abortion advocasy.
The Archbishop of Newark, New Jersey went even further, stating that he has a “more difficult time” with the “other option,” not mentioning President Trump by name.
The Cardinal made the comments during a webinar on “The Church and Catholic Voters in the 2020 Election.” The event was hosted yesterday by Boston College’s Boisi Center for Religion and American Public Life.
Cardinal Tobin gained notoriety in 2018 for tweeting, “Nighty-night baby. I love you.” He later deleted the Tweet and claimed it was “meant as a private communication with one of my sisters.” Beyond that, Tobin lacks credibility among numerous faithful Catholics in the United States. Among other things, he backed homosexual activists, such as Fr. James Martin, and personally welcomed an “LGBT Pilgrimage” to his cathedral. His position is that the Church is “moving on the question of same-sex couples.”
Contradicting Cardinal Tobin, several members of the hierarchy have come out in recent weeks and months, indicating that Catholics cannot vote for pro-abortion candidates like Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, as well as the Democratic Party as a whole because of its pro-abortion platform.
Bishop Joseph Strickland of Tyler, Texas, endorsed a video by Fr. James Altman in which he argued no Catholic could vote for the Democrat Party in the upcoming election.
“As the Bishop of Tyler I endorse Fr. Altman’s statement in this video,” the bishop wrote on Twitter. “My shame is that it has taken me so long. Thank you Fr Altman for your COURAGE. If you love Jesus & His Church & this nation…pleases (sic) HEED THIS MESSAGE.”
Bishop Rick Stika of Knoxville, Tennessee, tweeted, “How can a person say they are a faithful Catholic and yet support those who support the ultimate child abuse and human rights violation of those yet born? Slavery was legal at one time and yet now we look at it with horror. A child yet born is not the property of another.”
“A child not yet born is a total human person that must be protected,” he affirmed. “This nation will continue to decline if abortion continues. Those who love life will never go away and will continue to fight. The cause is just as it is the promotion of the dignity of the human person.”
Go here to read the rest.
As ever, chancery and conference functionaries have the dispositions of random NGO employees. That includes the bishop. You compare the American Church now to what it was in 1960 and the free fall is stupefying. Same deal in the Netherlands and in Quebec (in spades).
Yes, no good Catholic can vote for Biden as he is an accomplice of the devil, along with all Catholics who support the Democrat Party.
It is good to see a few Catholic Bishops saying the same thing even if less provocatively.
A phrase that keeps running through my mind on our President, in spite of his faults;
“ Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.”
In spite of his faults? Because of his faults!
That’s one of the things that gives you reason to think he just might be working God’s will.
So maybe Tobin was saying, “Nighty- night, baby. I love you” to his “brother” not his sister? Waiting for Cdl. Dolan and Pope Francis to make a public correction of Tobin, given that he’s leading souls to hell. Sadly the damage is done..
I really, really hate to be this guy, but here’s what Cardinal Ratzinger wrote in 2004:
“[N.B. 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 stand in favour of 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.]”
Not sure how that is being “that guy,” unless you can give a proportionate reason for active promotion of abortion, up to and including forcing people to perform them and forcing nuns to pay for them.
As was pointed out when that note was new:
Many suggested Cardinal Ratzinger was giving his blessing to voting for pro-aborts if there were enough other good things about them. But having a number of good points is not enough. As the Cardinal indicated, there must be counterbalancing reasons proportional to abortion.
Such reasons are not easy to come up with, particularly for candidates seeking offices that have the ability to impact abortion law significantly. These include the presidents who nominate Supreme Court justices and the senators who confirm them. One wants to weed out pro-abort candidates on the lowest level possible so that they can’t use their political track record to get elected to higher office. But the more impact the office has on abortion policy, the more weighty a reason must be to allow a vote for them.
What kind of reason would be needed to vote for a pro-abort candidate for president? Something unimaginably huge.
The Abortion Numbers
Consider: A million and a half new Americans are murdered every year by abortion.
While particular historical circumstances increase or decrease the number of Supreme Court appointments a president gets to make (some presidents get many and some get none), if we average out the differences, it turns out that a pro-abort president on average could extend the abortion holocaust by four years equivalent to the four-year term he spends in office.
At 1.5 million kids killed per year, that means that a pro-abort president would be responsible for extending the abortion holocaust to include six million additional murders.
When one takes into account the fact that about half of the recent presidents have had second terms, that would mean a pro-abort president would be responsible for extending the abortion holocaust to include approximately nine million Americans.
No other issue involves numbers that high. Nothing short of a full-scale nuclear or biological war between well-armed nation states would kill that many people, and we aren’t in imminent danger of having one of those.
Not even terrorists with weapons of mass destruction could kill that many people. As vital as the issue of terrorism is, it does not get us up into the number of deaths caused by abortion. It would take three thousand 9/11-size events in a president’s average term of office (more than one a day) to rack up sufficient deaths to make terrorism proportionate to abortion. Al-Qa’eda simply does not have enough suicidal fanatics to make terrorism proportionate to abortion.
Jobs? The economy? Taxes? Education? The environment? Immigration? Forget it. We do not have nine million people dying in a typical president’s term of office due to bad job programs, bad economic policies, bad taxes, bad education, bad environmental law, bad immigration rules—or even all of these combined. All of them together cannot provide a reason proportionate to the need to end abortion.
https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/explaining-ratzingers-proportionate-reasons
What would be the proportionate reasons for almost a million dead innocents a year, especially when the candidate is dedicated to ensuring that these deaths are celebrated as a constitutional right and all restrictions against said right struck down? I view this as a theoretical possibility only, rather than a, phew that allows me to continue to vote Democrat even though almost all their candidates are in favor of barely disguised infanticide. Of course it is the latter construct of the future Pope’s words relied on by Leftist Catholics.
Foxfier and Don, I generally agree with you on this. I wouldn’t vote for Biden for anything. I wouldn’t vote for a pro-abortion candidate for president, and it’s been years since I found a Democrat I could vote for at all.
I’m pushing back against a misstatement of the Catholic position, the idea that a Catholic cannot vote for a Democrat or that Bishop Tobin is leading people to Hell. It’s not the most dangerous false statement, like saying that Catholics worship Mary, but it is a false statement made for political gain. The truth doesn’t have to rely on a, at best, distortion. Worse, I sense momentum behind this misstatement. Heroes don’t get the option of committing to a falsehood in the name of the greater good.
Problem, Pinky– you didn’t show it is a false statement.
You were able to quote that it is theoretically possible to vote for someone who is “permissive” on abortion, but you did not show that it applies to this situation.
I agree Pinky, but I think the proportionate reason is not an individual subjective test. If it is it makes a mockery of any Catholic concept of being a responsible citizen.
Strictly speaking, you showed that it would be remote material cooperation with evil to vote for someone who is permissive on abortion, as opposed to a greater level of voluntary cooperation with evil. But that’s getting into the weeds.
At Biden’s level, I suspect proportionate would mean something like, the other party’s candidate is senile and clearly the puppet of puppet masters unknown to us.
Except that guy is Biden too.
This might be the only instance where a Catholic in good conscience would want to vote for the Democrat because it was important.
Transsexual Satanist Anarchist Is GOP Nominee for Cheshire County Sheriff. “New Hampshire’s first trans, anarchist, Satanic candidate for county sheriff says she’s not getting a lot of support from the Republican Party. “‘I can’t imagine they’re happy about this,’ said Aria DiMezzo. DiMezzo, who is running as a Republican with the campaign slogan ‘F*** the Police,’ said Friday she hasn’t had any help or support for the county or state GOP. DiMezzo won the Republican nomination for Cheshire County Sheriff Tuesday night running unopposed in the primary. She’ll now square off with popular incumbent Democrat Eli Rivera, who is running for his fifth term.”
First link was supposed to go to Instapundit, but doesn’t go anywhere.
Fixed it, the href etc went MIA.