As a practicing and faithful Catholic, I find the Democrats’ 2020 presidential ticket insulting. Here’s why. Joe Biden is what we call a heretical or cafeteria Catholic. He says he’s a Catholic, and brags about his Catholic heritage, but when it comes to what the Catholic Church actually teaches on moral issues, he picks and chooses what to believe, as if it were a salad bar. Kamala Harris is an anti-Catholic bigot, who thinks the Knights of Columbus is some sinister hate group that hurts women and gays, while she confirms federal judges who want to persecute nuns. Put this dynamic duo together, and the message the Democrats are sending to America’s Catholics is crystal clear. “The only good Catholic is a bad Catholic,” meaning one who doesn’t actually believe or practice the whole faith. If you oppose the Church, ignore its teachings, and actively persecute those who are faithful, then you’re okay. The Democratic Party will not only tolerate you, but it will nominate you for president. If, however, you actually believe the faith, follow its teachings, and practice it in your daily life; well, not only are you unfit for any federal office, but you should be legally punished as well.
Yes, the message is crystal clear. By putting a heretical and cafeteria Catholic at the top of the ticket, and an objectively anti-Catholic at the bottom of the ticket, the writing is on the wall. The only good Catholic is a bad Catholic. I guess the DNC has decided that being Catholic is tolerable, just so long as a Catholic really doesn’t believe that stuff. I mean, obviously we can’t help it if we’re Catholic. It’s sort of like being Jewish, right? You either are or you aren’t, right? It’s not our fault that we’re in the wrong religion. So the DNC won’t hold that against us. Just so long as we don’t actually believe Church teaching, and we’re willing to persecute those who do, it looks like there is plenty of room for us under the big-tent of the Democratic Party.
Yep. Message received! Loud and clear!!!
Joe Biden is the quintessential cafeteria Catholic. He’s a total heretic. He disagrees with the Church’s teachings on contraception, abortion and same-sex “marriage.” So he just chooses not to follow them. He goes to Mass, carries a rosary in his pocket, and presents himself for communion. But he wants the Faith on HIS terms, not God’s. He knows better than the Church, or so he thinks, telling God the real difference between right and wrong. Old Creepy Joe is not alone. There are millions of Catholics out there like him. But the Democratic Party has made it clear now that these are the ONLY type of Catholics welcome under their “big tent.” Faithful Catholics need not apply. They’ll make room for us, but only if we’re willing to give up certain things. Only if we’re willing to sell out on some very important Church teachings. Then, and only then, will the tent be open to us. Old Creepy Joe is the example. Just follow him, and you too can climb the ladder of success in the DNC.
Kamala Harris, on the other hand, now she’s really something. She confirmed federal judges who want to prosecute nuns that refuse to purchase birth control pills in their health insurance plans. She worked to close Catholic hospitals that don’t join her union allies. She has failed to prosecute pederast priests who pray upon teenage Catholic boys, contributing to the internal corruption of the Catholic Church. Then, during U.S. District Judge Brian Buescher’s confirmation hearing, she asked him if he was a member of the Knights of Columbus, insinuating that this is a bad thing which disqualified him from federal office. Then she implied that she might withhold her vote for, or against, him until after he resigned from the organization and repudiated it. The line of questioning revolved around abortion and same-sex “marriage,” which Harris militantly supports. The Knights of Columbus is a Catholic organization which requires its members to support Catholic teaching. So her line of questioning was not so much about the fraternal organization itself, as it was about the teachings of the Catholic Church. She was clearly saying, in no uncertain terms, that if you actually believe what the Catholic Church teaches, you’re unfit to hold public office.
By nominating this pair for president and vice president, I don’t see how the message of the Democratic Party could be more clear. Catholicism sucks! But if you’re a Catholic, we won’t hold that against you, just deny your Church’s teachings and you can be one of us.
How is this not offensive? How is this not insulting?
If you’re a Catholic, and you’re still a part of this political party, you’re part of the problem. By remaining a member, you’re sending the party leadership a clear message that this kind of condescending and bigoted garbage is okay. Why would you do that? Why would you betray your fellow Catholics this way? Are you a traitor to your faith, your own people? Why have you sided with the anti-Catholics?
Get out of that anti-Catholic party now!
History is not on their side.
Complete Christianity 
I would call Biden a reprobate rather than a heretic. At least, as far as I know he hasn’t denied doctrine but just said that he wouldn’t let it effect his politics. I don’t know. Maybe he’s denied doctrine elsewhere and I haven’t heard it. You could argue that by preaching that those can be separate he is preaching heresy. Either way, he is not living in public like a good Catholic and probably ought to be excommunicated. This was the first time I had heard anyone call the Knights of Columbus a hate-group.
LikeLike
Biden actually follows Catholic teaching in his personal life, he just does not impose it on non-Catholics as a matter of public policy and law. Isn’t this how it should be? Church teaching is just that, teaching. The Catholic church shouldn’t enlist the state to make its teachings part of the law.
LikeLike
This is not Catholic teaching, but sadly it is the product of poor catechesis in American Catholicism. For this reason, I do not view Joe Biden as a villain, but rather a stooge. He is the product of poor catechesis and zero discipline, for which his Catholic mentors (particularly his bishops) are solely to blame. Granted, Biden (like all Catholics) is bound by the principle of free-will to seek the truth, and he is therefore responsible for his own decisions in life. He could have, with minimal effort, sought the counsel of orthodox Catholic authorities, but intellectual honesty has never been an area of strength for Joe Biden. (I refer you to his multiple plagiarism scandals during the 1980s.) So Biden continues to epitomize the sad state of affairs for half of Catholic Americans; misinformed in some instances, and willfully ignorant in others.
That said, what is orthodox Catholic teaching on the separation of Church and State? Simple. The Catholic Church only tolerates it, as a less-than-ideal circumstance that Catholics are allowed to permit, but it should in every way be overridden whenever possible for both the moral and spiritual help of society. The moral law, and natural law, which are embraced by the Church, are to reign supreme in the lives of Catholics, and whenever possible, yes, they are to be imposed on all people, including non-Catholics. THAT is official Church teaching.
So, when a Catholic runs for political office, or seeks appointment to a government position, he can (and in some cases should) accept the separation of Church and State only insofar as it keeps the peace. However, he is morally and religiously obligated to override this separation whenever doing so is necessary for the general welfare of society, and is potentially tolerable to the society at large. Case in point; the wholesale murder of children in the womb is harmful to innocent life, motherhood and society in general (“Thou shalt not murder” — Exodus 20:13). The legal restriction of abortion is tolerable to most Americans, and indeed demonstrated successfully in other countries. Therefore, a Catholic politician is morally and religious obligated, in every sense, to work toward the restriction of abortion in any way possible.
For a Catholic politician to abdicate his moral and religious responsibility to safeguard society against muder, citing the “separation of Church and State” as his rationale is a dereliction of Catholic duty (according to orthodox Catholic teaching), and to vote in favor of such an intrinsic evil is nothing short of material cooperation in the mortal sin itself.
To back my point that this is indeed Church teaching, I cite the following official documents, ranking extremely high in the hierarchy of Catholic truth, just below infallible dogma…
“The Church, by reason of her role and competence, is not identified in any way with the political community nor bound to any political system. She is at once a sign and a safeguard of the transcendent character of the human person. The Church and the political community in their own fields are autonomous and independent from each other… Yet both, under different titles, are devoted to the personal and social vocation of the same men. The more that both foster sounder cooperation between themselves with due consideration for the circumstances of time and place, the more effective will their service be exercised for the good of all. For man’s horizons are not limited only to the temporal order; while living in the context of human history, he preserves intact his eternal vocation.” — Second Vatican Council, Gaudium et spes, 1965
“In fact, to wish that the State would separate itself from the Church would be to wish, by a logical sequence, that the Church be reduced to the liberty of living according to the law common to all citizens. It is true that in certain countries this state of affairs exists. It is a condition which, if it have numerous and serious inconveniences, also offers some advantages—above all when, by a fortunate inconsistency, the legislator is inspired by Christian principles—and, though these advantages cannot justify the false principle of separation nor authorize its defense, they nevertheless render worthy of toleration a situation which, practically, might be worse.” — Pope Leo XIII, Au milieu des sollicitudes, 1892
“That the State must be separated from the Church is a thesis absolutely false, a most pernicious error. … [It] is in the first place a great injustice to God. … [W]e owe Him, therefore, not only a private cult, but a public and social worship to honor Him… [The separation of Church and State] limits the actions of the State to the pursuit of public prosperity during this life only. … But as the present order of things is temporary and subordinated to the conquest of man’s supreme and absolute welfare, it follows that the civil power must not only place no obstacle in the way of this conquest, but must aid us in affecting it.” — Pope St. Pius X, Vehementer Nos, 1906
LikeLike
We have a duty to reject civil laws that are contrary to church teaching, publicly and pay the price of standing up for our beliefs. Anything less is compromising our values and adopting the values of the world. There is no such thing as private Christianity, at the end of the day we have to stand up and be counted.
LikeLike
Joe Biden does not follow Catholic teaching in his personal life. Just for example, he personally and voluntarily, officiated a same-sex marriage.
LikeLiked by 2 people
You cannot vote for any Democrat. They all reject our Lord’s teachings. To force charity on people is not the Catholic way. Charity must be freely given. In fact even to vote for a Democrat during the 1930’s to 1960.s was to reject Our Lord.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Mr. Glackin, I’m sorry to say that you’re probably right.
LikeLike
Thank you for speaking the truth clearly and boldly!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Would the author label a certain thrice married, twice divorced, boastful serial adulterer who says he’s never asked God’s forgiveness and has nothing to be forgiven for is, as well, a “cafeteria Christian?” Those are our choices.
LikeLike
Both Trump and Biden claim to be Christians, and I’ve not challenged the Christianity of either one. What I have done is challenge the legitimacy of Joe Biden’s Catholicism, and based on everything I’ve described above, I think it has merit.
As for Donald Trump, last I heard, he was a Presbyterian. I’m not a Presbyterian, so I have nothing to say about that. If there are some Presbyterians out there who want to challenge the legitimacy of Donald Trump’s Presbyterianism, then they won’t hear an argument from me.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It seems that this URL has been blocked by Facebook. I’m not surprised. The Left isn’t really all that much into the freedom of speech or freedom of religion.
LikeLike