Washington D.C., Apr 29, 2017 / 05:27 am (CNA/EWTN News).- Catholic leaders have found cause for both praise and concern after the first 100 days of Donald Trump’s presidency.
“Catholics have reason for optimism. But like the first 100 days, the road ahead remains difficult,” Brian Burch, president of CatholicVote.org, said on the organization’s scorecard for the first 100 days of the Trump presidency.
Abortion
Pro-life leaders have found a lot to like from the Trump administration so far.
“President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence have been game changers for the pro-life movement,” Susan B. Anthony List president Marjorie Dannenfelser stated. “Not only have there been several pro-life victories within the first 100 days of their administration, we are confident that pro-life progress will continue. This is a new era.”
A week after Trump was inaugurated, Vice President Mike Pence addressed the 44th annual March for Life on the National Mall, the first time a sitting vice president has done so. Senior advisor Kellyanne Conway also addressed the pro-life rally.
“Life is winning in America,” Pence insisted to cheering attendees, as he exhorted them to “let this movement be known for love, not anger” and “let it be known for compassion, not confrontation.”
On Jan. 23, Trump reinstated the Mexico City Policy which bans U.S. funding of international non-government organizations that promote or perform abortions.
This is traditionally one of the first policy decisions a new president makes and serves as a signal of the administration’s policy on abortion. President Reagan first introduced the policy in 1984. It was repealed by President Clinton when he took office, reinstated by President Bush in 2001, and repealed again by President Obama in 2009.
In April, the Trump administration pulled its funding of the UNFPA over its involvement in China’s infamous two-child policy, formerly a one-child policy, which has resulted in mass forced sterilizations and abortions. Funding was redirected to USAID for family planning purposes.
Cardinal Timothy Dolan, chair of the U.S. bishops’ pro-life committee, called the funding withdrawal a “victory for women and children across the globe.”
Shortly afterward, the administration signed a joint resolution passed by Congress that nullified an Obama administration rule that pro-life leaders had called a “parting gift to Planned Parenthood.”
That rule forbade states from withholding federal Title X funds to health providers simply because they performed abortions. Now with the rule nullified, states can once again block Planned Parenthood and other abortion groups from Title X funding. Cardinal Dolan also approved of that rule change, calling it a reversal of “very bad public policy.”
In addition to signing bills into law, “personnel is policy,” Jeanne Mancini, president of the March for Life, insisted to reporters on a Thursday conference call on Trump’s first 100 days.
She pointed to the picks of Vice President Mike Pence and senior advisor Kellyanne Conway as two examples of President Trump surrounding himself with persons with strong pro-life records.
Burch agreed that “President Trump has assembled a great Cabinet.”
He pointed to the pro-life appointments at the Department of Health and Human Services as examples of this. Former pro-life congressman Dr. Tom Price was tapped to be Secretary of Health and Human Services; Dr. Charmaine Yoest, former CEO of the pro-life group Americans United for Life, has been named to be assistant secretary of public affairs at HHS; and lawyer Matt Bowman, formerly of Alliance Defending Freedom, was also picked to join HHS.
“The Trump administration is staffed with thousands of high-caliber individuals like this,” Burch said.
Mancini also pointed to Trump’s nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch to replace the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia as another positive sign for the pro-life movement.
“Justice Gorsuch is a constitutionalist, committed to respecting the text and intent of lawmakers rather than legislating from the bench,” Burch stated, giving Trump an “A+” grade for the Supreme Court nomination.
CatholicVote provided a report card for Trump’s first 100 days. They gave Trump an “A” grade on the “sanctity of life” issues, noting that other achievements like the defunding of Planned Parenthood are still expected.
Although Gorsuch had not ruled specifically on an abortion case as judge, pro-life leaders have noted his dissent in a Tenth Circuit decision that overturned Utah’s defunding of Planned Parenthood.
Additionally, in his confirmation hearings, when asked by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) if a “super-precedent” existed for the Court’s Roe decision that legalized abortion, Gorsuch would not say that one existed, only saying that the Roe decision had “precedent,” according to EWTN’s Dr. Matthew Bunson.
Gorsuch was confirmed by the Senate on April 7 after Democrats threatened a filibuster. Republican Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) invoked the “nuclear option” to end the filibuster threat, whereby Gorsuch could then be confirmed with a simple majority vote. He was confirmed by the Senate 54-45.
Religious Freedom
Gorsuch’s appointment is expected to impact religious freedom cases for years to come. One of the first major cases he heard from the Supreme Court bench was the religious freedom case of Trinity Lutheran, a preschool in Columbia, Mo. operated by Trinity Lutheran Church. That case is expected to be the premier religious freedom case of the Spring 2017 term.
Gorsuch sat over high-profile HHS mandate cases while he was on the Tenth Circuit, ruling both times with plaintiffs – Hobby Lobby and the Little Sisters of the Poor – in favor of their religious freedom to not comply with the birth control mandate and the supposed “accommodation” offered by the government to objecting non-profits.
Another significant move by Trump administration was to stop fighting in court for the Obama administration’s “transgender mandate.” That policy had directed schools to let students use the bathroom of their current gender identity and not their birth gender.
Leading U.S. bishops had criticized the mandate as infringing on the “privacy concerns” of young students and said it “contradicts a basic understanding of human formation so well expressed by Pope Francis: that ‘the young need to be helped to accept their own body as it was created’.”
After the administration announced it would drop its appeal for the policy in court, the Supreme Court sent a Virginia transgender bathroom case back to the lower courts.
However, the administration’s accomplishments in upholding religious freedom have ultimately been mixed, advocates argue, and one large reason why is that Trump has not issued a broad executive order upholding religious freedom and the rights of conscience as expected.
This is vital, Dr. Jay Richards of the Busch School of Business at The Catholic University of America said, because for any entity contracting with the government – or institutions receiving federal funding like Christian schools that provide federal student loans – they could be subject to actions from the government stemming from Obama-era orders on LGBT status.
Thus, charities or schools that uphold traditional marriage as part of their mission could be subject to actions from the government, unless a new executive order protects them.
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops tried to get support for such an executive order, insisting that “any Executive Order should make it clear that religious freedom entails more than the freedom to worship but also includes the ability to act on one’s beliefs. It should also protect individuals and families who run closely-held businesses in accordance with their faith to the greatest extent possible.”
CatholicVote gave Trump a “C-“ grade on religious freedom issues, noting that “a leaked draft of an excellent Executive Order” on religious freedom “was stymied, according to reports, by Jared and Ivanka Trump along with outside left-wing groups.”
“Catholics are patient, but want action on religious liberty. And soon,” Burch said.
Refugees and Immigration
Early in his first 100 days, Trump issued an executive order to temporarily halt refugee admissions into the U.S. for four months and indefinitely suspend the admission of Syrian refugees. The order also halted visa admissions for most persons from seven countries: Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen.
The order was ultimately halted from going into effect by the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court. A revised executive order that was released later left out the indefinite ban on Syrian refugees and left Iraq off the list of countries from which most nationals would be barred from entering the U.S. It still halted refugee admissions for four months and capped the overall intake for FY 2017 at 50,000 refugees.
Bishop Joe Vasquez of Austin, Tex., the chair of the U.S. bishops’ migration committee, was “deeply troubled” at the revised order and said that the refugee admissions program was already well-vetted and secure. Catholic Relief Services said that since global forced displacement is at its highest levels ever recorded, the U.S. must not shut off its refugee admissions program.
The order was ultimately halted from going into effect by federal judges in Hawaii and Maryland.
Trump also signed an executive order in January that would bar federal funding of “sanctuary cities,” or cities that publicly did not follow through with federal laws on deportation of undocumented immigrants. The chair of the U.S. bishops’ migration committee, Bishop Joe Vasquez of Austin, Tex., stated that the move “would force all jurisdictions to accept a one-size-fits-all regime that might not be best for their particular jurisdictions.”
In February, the Department of Homeland Security, enforcing the immigration orders, released new rules that did away with protections for unaccompanied children and asylum seekers coming to the border, created new detention centers, sped up the deportation process, and increased the punishments for undocumented parents who have their children smuggled into the U.S.
Bishop Vasquez warned that the new rules “greatly expand the militarization of the U.S.-Mexico border.”
CatholicVote, meanwhile, rated Trump’s immigration policies so far a “B,” saying that “his poorly drafted and delivered order on restricting refugees from dangerous countries was revised and continues to face legal opposition,” but “his stepped-up enforcement has rightly focused on hardened criminals while moderating on those who immigrated illegally as children (Dreamers).”
“Illegal immigration has plummeted, even without a wall,” Burch stated.
Health Care
Another major priority for Trump’s first 100 days was health care. A replacement for the Affordable Care Act was introduced in March with the goal of passing it on March 23, the seven-year anniversary of the ACA being signed into law.
The proposed American Health Care Act attempted to keep in place some policies of the original health care law like a ban on insurers denying coverage based on pre-existing conditions, and young people being able to stay on their parents’ health plans until the age of 26.
However, it sought to replace other major parts of the law. The individual mandate – enforced by fines for people not having health insurance – would be replaced with a fine of up to 30 percent of one’s new premium for a significant gap in coverage. Federal subsidies would be replaced with tax credits for purchasing insurance.
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops had ultimately opposed the Affordable Care Act under Obama because of provisions they said allowed for abortion funding in health plans. They praised the original health care law’s expansion of coverage for low-income and sick groups, although they opposed its lack of coverage for immigrants.
With the new proposal, leading bishops praised its protections against federal funding of elective abortions, but expressed serious concerns with its lack of conscience protections for doctors and other health care providers against government mandates like the transgender mandate.
Additionally, Bishop Frank Dewane of Venice, Fla., chair of the bishops’ domestic justice committee, worried that the new legislation could result in less affordable coverage for groups that need it the most: the elderly, the chronically ill, and the poor. For instance, the tax credits replacing subsidies were not favorably written for the elderly, he said. The 30 percent fine for a gap in coverage could act as a deterrent for someone to purchase health coverage.
Groups like the Catholic health care ministry (CMF) CURO, however, supported passage of the new bill as a step in the direction of more patient-centered health care reform, as well as a law that would help reduce abortion funding in health care.
Ultimately, the American Health Care Act failed to even make it to the House floor for a vote, but has been amended and brought back to consideration in the House. Among the new additions is an amendment that allows states to do away with “essential health benefits” like coverage for maternity care and hospitalizations that were mandated under the Affordable Care Act.
Bishop Dewane issued a strong statement this week criticizing the revised health care bill for similar reasons as he opposed the original AHCA. Members of Congress should not vote for the revised bill, he said on Thursday.
Foreign Policy
On foreign policy, Trump ordered missile strikes earlier this month on a Syrian airbase in response to a chemical weapons attack in Idlib that killed around 100 and hospitalized hundreds. After the Syrian air force had bombed a neighborhood in the Idlib province, hundreds of civilians either died or were hospitalized with symptoms of exposure to sarin, a deadly nerve agent.
The U.S. said that forces of Syrian president Bashar al-Assad were responsible for the attack, and a U.S. aircraft carrier in the Mediterranean launched Tomahawk cruise missiles against the airbase that was used by Syrian forces for the bombing.
Moral theologian Joseph Capizzi of The Catholic University of America told CNA that the response was “judicious” and was needed to uphold international agreements against the use of chemical weapons. Dr. Tom Farr of Georgetown University said “the strikes were fully justified, both as a means of punishing the evil acts that took place – especially (but not only) the slow torture and execution of babies by means of Sarin gas – and as a means of deterring the regime from further acts of evil like this.”
Meanwhile, Syrian clerics decried the attack, saying that an investigation should have been first conducted to prove who the perpetrators of the chemical attack were. Melkite Archbishop Jean-Clement Jeanbart of Aleppo told CNA he hoped the U.S. “would have done something toward peace and reconciliation and a political solution” in Syria.
[…]
I’m sick and tired of these surveys. They are TOTALLY meaningless. Unless they specifically define the major independent variable i.e. what it means by “Catholic”, it’s useless.
-Is a “Catholic” someone who is baptized and has received no other Sacraments?
-Is a “Catholic” someone who calls him/herself Catholic without any further explanation (as when homosexuals say they are “married”)?
-Is a “Catholic” someone who says they’re a Catholic and hasn’t practiced the religion in 30 years?
-Is a “Catholic” someone who was baptized a Catholic but now belongs to some non-denominational worhip community?
-Is a “Catholic” someone who has received all the Sacraments of Initiation, attends Mass weekly, goes to Confession at least monthly, and does not practice contraception?
-Is a “Catholic” someone who rejects the work of Vatican Council II and believes the Chair of Peter is vacant?
-Is a Catholic someone who only attends Mass in the Extraordinary Form?
-Is a “Catholic” a person who lives in a homosexual relationship with a man whom he thinks is his wife?
-Is a “Catholic” someone who belongs to the Society of Jesus?
-Is a “Catholic” someone who was baptized Catholic but now is an atheist?
-Is a “Catholic” someone who was baptized a Catholic but married a Jew and received instruction in the Jewish faith and now attends synagogue?
I think everyone gets the point that it’s pointless to refer to “Catholics” as a group without any further specification.
You’re not God’s ID checker, mate, these people are Catholic.
That’s about the most uneducated comment I’ve yet to read in these pages, mate.
Why not respond to the point I’m making. When you do a survey, it’s essential to define the terms. But, then again, you don’t seem terribly educated.
You cannot set your own criteria for who can be considered a Catholic and who cannot. You are like the takfirists of the Islamic world. Check your own education, mate.
Perhaps, mate, you should do some study about conducting survey research and their statistical treatment before leveling charges.
As an addendum, the very least the Pew “survey” could have done (which would still be woefully inadequate) would have been to conduct a stratified random sanple of “Catholics.” The survey, if they knew anything at all about Catholicism and its teachings, could have looked at the opinions of two groups of Catholics: a. those who practiced the religion by weekly Mass attendance, at least monthy Confession and who accepted all the teachings of the Catholic Church as contained in the Catechism and b.those who identified as “Catholic” but who hadn’t attended Mass and been to Confession in the previous twelve months and who rejected some or all of the Church’s teachings. Then the survey respondants could reply to questions about: married priests, women priests, opinions about the current Pope, etc. To have lumped all “Catholics” together and then generalize about this to views held by ALL Catholics leads to grossly misrepresented realities. That’s why the Pew Survey is worthless.
Spot on, Deacon. Useless, Meaningless. And more than likely Very Misleading.
Years ago, a friend told me how annoying he found it that whereas someone raised Protestant might say something like “My family is Prebyterian, but I don’t consider myself much of anything,” someone raised Catholic will still identify as Catholic even if he or she hasn’t set foot in a Catholic church since the last wedding or funeral, disagrees with (or even denounces) much of what the Church teaches, and practices it even less.
I’m reminded of a scene in a movie (title forgotten) I saw a number of years ago, in which upon hearing one of his sons take the Lord’s Name in vain, the father says, “We don’t talk like that in this house!” The son replies, “Aw, Dad, you don’t even believe in God,” to which the father replies, “That don’t mean I can’t be a good Catholic.” I believe it’s the ounce of truth that makes a joke funny.
Thank you, Edward. Your questions are very, very relevant, especially as the numbers of attendees at mass in Catholic and other Christian churches plummet across the world and “vocations” from indiginous congregations are close to extinction and have to be supplemented with often dubiously motivated “imports” from poor countries where a career as a catholic priest in a western country is seen as an excellent way for people, even with zero faith, to dramatically improve their standard of living, income and ability to pull up the living standards of family and friends by assisting their “ripple-effect” “follow-on” emigration.
The precipitous fall off in membership, the growing numbers of vacant churches and other surplus church properties show-case the increasing irrelevance of the Roman Catholic Church as an institution, in the lives of people around the world.
I am a retired senior UN official who carried a diplomatic passport for many years and was involved at the highest levels within UN administrations in very many countries. What I write next conforms to my rigorous approach to all such serious arguments. I NEVER write on such subjects that which I have not had exhaustively researched and That the Church is a deeply misogynistic, appallingly hypocritical cabal of elderly Cardinals, with reputedly over 80% of them practising homosexuals, most making frequent use of homosexual or transexual prostitutes ( ref. bokk entitled In the Closet of the Vatican-author Frederic Martel ) seems to be now an un-deniable fact of reputable research and extensive judicial and legal uiry. The exhaustive and validated research for this sad but extremely important book, named above, demonstrated, beyond any reasonable doubt, with copious US State dept file references, easily viewable at the library of Congress ( my ex- colleagues in Washington did this for me ) that the appalling Pope Wotila had long complicitly presided over the most extra-ordinary overt excesses of this overt homosexuality in the Curia and in the shocking protection of senior prelates and religious involved in the most appalling deviant sexual crimes against not only children but against student religious across the world. In an un-deniable demonstration of the then in-human values of the RCC, Pope Wotila groomed, then employed, funded and directed a particularly perverted homosexual Cardinal, Lopez Trujillo, from Columbia, to search out and inform the murderous right-wing military juntas all over South America, about hundreds of priests active in South America, helping poor communities through the Liberation Theology movement. Dozens of these saintly priests were arrested or “disappeared, tortured for information and subsequently murdered, with the active collusion of Trujillo and his boss, Wotila. These accusations are fully supported by CIA documents now publically available at the library of Congress, through US freedom of information laws. All the necessary details are available in the book, to allow easy cross-checking and validation.
I repeat, the book makes for unpleasant reading, especially as it provides all necessary references and sources. The RCC would like the book to be forgotten. People with a real interest in what the RCC stands for, in today’s world, should at least review what it is all about, in that cess pool that is the Curia.
“According to the survey, most Catholics in all seven countries want the Church to allow Catholics to use birth control, including 86% of Argentinians and 83% of Americans.”
According to the survey, Most Catholics in all seven countries want the Church to affirm their choice to dissent from Church teaching guilt-free regarding contraception . . .
There, fixed it.
No catechesis, erroneous catechesis, marginal catechesis abandoned before high school, comprehensive catechesis willfully abandoned since 1966 — what do you expect? I witnessed it then as a student, and a few years later as a secondary school religion teacher. Boy, did I witness it then, and scandalously so from Catholic educators in positions of administration, religious.
Today I suspect you could find support for the spectrum of immorality amongst self-identifying Roman Catholics.
Here we read of the collapse of Roman Catholicism at the hands of a post-conciliar episcopate addicted to the zeitgeist in support of their personal hubris.
The inspiration of the Holy Spirit is always present but men most frequently do not listen, so said Joseph Ratzinger.
By their fruits you shall know them.
I would venture to humbly suggest that Holy Mother Church could use more Protestant converts, especially Evangelical Protestant converts who are already regular Bible studiers who are generally thrilled to find that the Bible that they know backwards and forwards and have memorized hundreds of verses out of actually has MORE books than they grew up with and who eagerly open their new Catholic Bible and read/study/devour these books which they have always been told were “apocrypha”!
Also, these converts already regularly read and study Christian books (including ancient Christian books) and buy up giant tote bags of all the Catholic books at the Catholic conferences they attend and from Catholic online sites (like this one!)!
They also love hearing Catholic speakers who present hour-long talks on “deep subjects” and hand out 20 pages of notes which include an extensive bibliography of classic theology texts which usually includes works by the early Church Fathers!
And Evangelical Protestant converts already know how to play/sing inspiring music of all genres that encourages, comforts, and energizes Christians.
And most importantly, Evangelical Protestants are used to working in their churches and are eager to be invited to help teach a class or Bible study, become a youth group sponsor, help with various outreaches to children (VBS can be done in Catholic parishes!), volunteer to sing or play at Masses, sign up for Eucharistic Adoration, attend prayer meetings and devotions, and help with other work in the parish. What Evangelical Protestants don’t like is sitting around doing nothing and becoming “fat Christians” gorged on all the information that they have acquired during their studies!
So let’s get crackin’ on that outreach/evangelism to Protestants, shall we?! Then we’ll have even more people who want to help with all that needs to be done in Holy Mother Church!
My late husband and I converted to Catholicism in 2004, and our daughters and son-in-law converted, and our grandson has been baptized Catholic and when there are openings, will attend Catholic pre-school! We have talked to many other friends who are Evangelical Protestants and I believe that many of these folks will eventually find their way home to Rome!
Keep doing the Eucharistic Conferences and add “mini-conferences” in every city and town in the U.S.–these conferences are a great way to reach out to Protestants who are looking for teaching, preaching, and really good music (which isn’t necessarily present at all Masses in most Catholic churches). In the process of experiencing the teaching, preaching, and really good music, Protestants will eventually be confronted by Jesus in the Holy Eucharist–and yes, they will recognize him. We did.
And when they come home, put ’em to work! Start out slow (Lenten fish fry servers) and build them up to more and more work! They’ll love it!
God reward you. Who could contradict you…your personal witness and that of so many other Protestants who have braved the Tiber in this tragic epoch in the history of the Church, Scott Hahn, John Bergsma, Marcus Grodi come to mind.
A Catholic from my birth long before “the” mid-century council, I don’t know if I’d be willing to take the journey now during the Bergoglian debacle.
You have a courage inspired by the Holy Spirit.
Mrs. Hess above (2:10 p.m.) – Touche!
I am very surprised with the support for female ordination to priesthood as such. (Married priests do exist and have existed including married bishops, so the support of married clergy is entirely logical and beneficial for the Church, for many reasons including deflating “so-called clericalism.) But “a female ordination” simply cannot exist because a priest during the Liturgy is an icon of Christ and Christ is a male. As long as Catholics believe in the Real Presence and that the Sacrifice is done today and in eternity, a female priest will convey a destruction of that reality.
I connect this strange idea (of a female ordination) with the loss of experience of Mass as a whole as the metaphysical reality and also with the loss of understanding of the holy images as a representation of that reality. To my mind, a push for female priesthood indicates a loss of a belief in the Real Presence.
Important suggestion;
Read, re-read with notes, the deeply researched and fully referenced, but truly sad and yet most important book, “In the Closet of the Vatican”, by Frederic Martel and then ask yourself, ” Should the RCC ban MEN from EVER being priests ? Should the priesthood be reserved solely for women, who have a far, far lower rate of sexual, homosexual, paedophile perversions ( all different and not necessarily linked categories ) criminal tendencies, corruption, misogyny and violent tendencies.
The RCC is a deeply and irredeemably misogynistic organisation, run by a predominantly homosexual and deviant Curia. It is dying on it’s corrupt feet as we watch. If it’s potential for social betterment is to be realised before it dissapears completely, after a relatively short life of just 2000 years, it needs to be replaced, not reformed, by a female-led alternative. Have a close look at what is happening with women-led parishes there. That is the only future, but you will have to hurry before the sand of numbers runs out in the great hour-glass in the sky !!!
“… by Frederic Martel…”
Complete loss of credibility right there. Next.
According to the survey, most Catholics aren’t.
And shocking news that is…if you’ve never been to any large gatherings of Catholics, or been in churches with them, when they go…best chances to see one there, though, would be Christmas and Easter, often best described as the annual or semi-annual nationwide meeting of heretics anonymous.
DeaconEdwardPeitler, jpfhays, and Mrs. Hess are absolutely correct. But the problem is much bigger than bogus woke surveys like this one purporting to describe what “Catholics” believe. What such surveys, corrected and understood properly as noted by these comments, is that the number of true, practicing, orthodox Catholics is a tiny fraction of the total. Among such real Catholics the “favorability” of Bergoglio is vanishingly small.
The sheer volume of uncatechised “catholics” is shocking. In many Catholic schools, more than half the teachers don’t practice the faith, 80% of students don’t attend Sunday Mass, and the pastor pops up once a week to offer Mass. Nobody cares about any doctrine, nor dilution of doctrine, nor bad vs good priests, the students on FB and TikTok like any secular school.
But this survey also proves – the Church cannot be a “democracy”, never was in history, and Jesus did not start the Church thus. Because the vast majority are unschooled in theology. Even the apostles, 3/4 of the time they didn’t understand and Jeusus pulls them aside to teach more. Therefore this “Synodality” is absolute elephant-sh!t. All the “listening” is “feel good” but will bring demands for women priests, gay marriage, and communion for the divorced and even divorce without bothering with annulment. “Synodality” has fractured the Anglicans, the Vatican knows that, and that they keep pushing “synodality” means it is deliberately to say “oh it is the voice of the Holy Spirit”. There will be Judgement.
Chris: Even though Deacon Edward’s survey comments are true, Your comments in your first paragraph are also very much true, and well put.
I suspect the lack of clarity in definitions, such as what is a Catholic, is one of the conscious objectives. The main objective is to meet the demands of the Liberal objectives of the elites and the Left.
It is a shame when simple observance of moral laws and the value of human life is always classified as “conservative”.
The sad reality is that most Catholics are totally clueless slaves of the Devil who base their opinions on nothing more than their own worldly desires.
Evidence of resurgent Pelagianism…the 5th-century Pelagius was of the opinion (another opinion!) that man is naturally perfectible, without grace or even growth, and that at worse what is involved day-to-day is only infractions of some superficial rule or other, followed by a superficial reset. Ever upward, hoisted by our own bootstraps! Maybe even “walking together”…
St. Augustine, however, detected, even from his own life, an interior accountability to very deep truths (about which even the Church is “neither the author nor the arbiter” as affirmed in Veritatis Splendor). Something about a “sin” original to ourselves–and sometimes an abysmal betrayal of both God and self–not simply a broken rule awaiting societal amendment. (Recalling, too, that Islam also denies the dimension of original sin and, in the Qur’an, also omits the moral absolutes in the last six prohibitive Commandments.)
So, in the PEW survey, surely there was the unreported and most basic question: “Beyond evolutionary social conventions and taboos, are you a follower of Pelagius (say what?) and totally clueless about the profound difference between good and evil?”
Probably 86% opinionated, “Yes”! So, have a smiley-button day, y’all, and a doughnut.