Biden reaches out to Catholics like himself, embracing a key group in big 2020 states

A huge problem today, which is the source of much confusion, is the word “official” in your post. The evil one has succeeded in throwing MUCH dust in the air to obscure the truth that, as you rightly say, "The Holy Spirit will not allow error to be taught. "

The evil one delights when error is taught in one way or another, by men wearing the garments of the Church, and appearing on the surface to be “speaking officially.”

Jesus said it right:

Mt 23:2 "The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat;
Mt 23:3 so practice and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do; for they preach, but do not practice.
Mt 23:4 They bind heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on men’s shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with their finger.
Mt 23:5 They do all their deeds to be seen by men; for they make their phylacteries broad and their fringes long,
Mt 23:6 and they love the place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the synagogues,
Mt 23:7 and salutations in the market places, and being called rabbi by men.

When, and as long as, they are sitting in Truth “on the chair of Moses” - or the chair of Peter - then yes, that is “official”. When they are in Truth NOT speaking divine revelation but merely their own opinions, then those opinions must be judged in the Spirit by those listening, and decided for or against as opinions or suggestions. We must obey God and not men, no matter what clothes they wear.

But these days, there is much confusion concerning what is of the Faith, and what is the non-infallible “prudential” judgment of clergy of whatever rank.

Imagine calling yourself Catholic and still think that abortion is perfectly fine and force the general public to pay for it…


Yeah. Official…meaning ‘official’. No, not everything out of a clergy’s mouth. The official teaching authority of the Church…the bishops IN UNION with the pope. Not some rogue bishop saying this or that. Not some spontaneous comment during an airplane interview…thanks for clarifying.

Imagine being a Catholic and supporting the Constitution. And capital punishment. And, formerly, slavery.

Lots of apples and oranges there, friend.

The point is, a Catholic remains Catholic whether they are good , that is, orthodox practicing Catholics who support the teachings, or ‘bad’, that is, heterodox Catholics who deny some, many, or even ‘all’ the teachings.

Catholic is Catholic.

A Catholic who supported slavery would be a Catholic or either misunderstood the Catholic teaching (due to a lack of knowledge regarding chattel slavery or an imperfect understanding of the system, or of personal dignity, etc) or a person who knew and understood the Catholic teaching and chose to ignore it due to a desire for wealth etc. And it’s the same with abortion. A Catholic who chooses to reject Catholic teaching is a heterodox Catholic, whether they choose to reject it due to lack of understanding, or whether they choose to reject for some kind of personal gain; however, a Catholic who does not truly know or understand may not be personally culpable for the objective sin in ignoring or disobeying the teaching, whereas the Catholic who does know and chooses to reject it IS culpable.

The poor Catholics who are deluded into thinking that abortion is not sinful, or ‘not in some circumstances’, or that it’s a simple ‘religious’ issue rather than one of human rights, or that it’s OK up until a certain point, etc., may or may not be culpable for the objective mortal sin of disagreeing with the teaching of the Church. A young person with rabidly liberal relatives and a lack of exposure to teaching, even with it being widely available on the Internet, will probably have much less culpability than a middle aged or older person who has had plenty of experience with pro-life family and friends, plenty of access to authentic church documents, etc.

With great knowledge, to paraphrase, comes great responsibility.

1 Like

Thankfully, the writers of the Constitution were aware that the norms back then would be changed over time to better society. By the way, I agree that capital punishment is unconstitutional based on the eighth amendment.

Woo hoo! Tell the originalists like Scalia and Amy Coney Barrett. They are not big believers in a changing Constitution or changing norms.

They’re both guilty then.

k, I’m a convert, my mother is an evangelical, die hard Republican, and I know from the references I’ve heard from her mouth that it at least seems evangelical Protestants are Trump supporters.
I hope that’s correct. And as far as “sense” goes, I hope and pray all American voters have enough to not vote Biden, regardless of their faith or anything else.


It is always a fallacy? Always? I can show you government programs that are out of control. There are thousands if not millions of example where government launches creates a new program that years later hasnt help fix the problem.

Even the example you use prove it can happen and does happen. People do become drunks, people do become fat. People do become addicted to drugs.

But nowhere in the constitution is government given the right to force people into compulsory military(this is one of the reason the draft hasnt been used in 40+ years, you get better result by voluntary service. A main belief of libertarians.) or peace corps service, all able-bodied citizens required to mentor a student or visit an elder in a rest home or serve meals at homeless shelters. You would have to change the constitution and once you give government the power to do something to it citizen. They will never stop using it to force “social justice”

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

We may have not used the draft in decades, but registration for selective service is still mandated. The selective service data base is where the draft notices will be sent from.

The Constitution clearly says that the gov. has the ability to do such a thing, and the courts have upheld the Constitutionality of the draft.

No, that had nothing to do with it. It was the extreme unpopularity of the Vietnam War. No one was questioning the constitutionality of the draft during WWII. There were objectors, but they did not win in court.

Amen, sister.

Yes, there were people questioning the draft as far back as the civil war.

Yes, but they never won in court, and that’s how something is declared unconstitutional.

No clue how this became about the draft, which I wholly support…
As to the OP, I forgot to mention in my initial reply that, I pray there are no “Catholics like himself” for Biden to reach.

It came about because some one posted

compulsory military or peace corps service, mandatory study of the Constitution, abolishing half the federal government, voter ID requirement, all able-bodied citizens required to mentor a student or visit an elder in a rest home or serve meals at homeless shelters, etc.


Without cutting and pasting each post, I ask why stop there? Why not force people into other situations?

I questioned that it is not always wrong. But then later he take part of the constitution to justify his belief that government can force anyone to do “public service”

The Congress shall have Power * * * To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.

But in todays world the Militia is the state and national guard and yes the government has the authority and power to activate the state and national guard. But when it does it is because of a natural disaster or war.

But now there are people who see no problem with the government taking are part of the constitution that give it the power to call up the national/state guard and apply it to civilians and have them provide social services.

How is forcing " all able-bodied citizens required to mentor a student or visit an elder in a rest home or serve meals at homeless shelters, etc" going to be any good to anyone?

We are getting closer to 1984 and it is the “those that shall not be label” who are the thought police and big brother.

When he say “like himself”, does he mean lost, wayward Catholics who publicly flaunt Church teachings while hiding behind the “I am personally opposed, but publicly for xyz” nonsense, in addition to ministering at gay weddings and hoping to relitigate the contraceptive mandate against the Little Sisters of the Poor?

That’s a pretty niche group, Big Guy.


C’mon man…here’s the deal! :roll_eyes:

That’s malarkey.

1 Like
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit