The Independent News Source
NCR on Kindle - NCR classifieds - YouTube - Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Printer-friendly version
PDF versionHealth Care: Transcript of Cardinal George June 16 NCR interview
by John L Allen Jr on Jun. 22, 2010
By JOHN L. ALLEN JR.
In the latest twist to the saga of intra-Catholic tensions over health care reform, the U.S. bishops’ top communications officer has accused a Catholic media outlet of “fabricating” critical quotes from Cardinal Francis George, president of the conference, about the Catholic Health Association during a recent closed-door gathering of the bishops in St. Petersburg, Florida.
That outlet, the Catholic News Agency, is standing by its report.
Based in Denver, the Catholic News Agency is an offshoot of the Latin American Catholic news service ACI-Prensa, and partners with EWTN in an internet news service. It’s not related to the Catholic News Service, the official news outlet of the U.S. bishops.
Last week, both the Catholic Health Association and the U.S. bishops held plenary assemblies for the first time since the fierce national debate over health care reform, which saw the two groups at odds because of differing conclusions about the legislation’s impact on abortion.
My story on the CHA assembly, combined with a phone interview with George from St. Petersburg, can be found here: http://ncronline.org/news/politics/minding-gap-between-bishops-and-catho.... The bottom line was that neither side is backing down from their substantive positions, but both say they want to overcome the gap.
In the wake of the bishops’ gathering, the Catholic News Agency also ran a story reporting on what George had told the bishops, citing unnamed sources in the meeting. Among other things, the story quoted George as referring to “so-called Catholic groups” that supported health care reform, suggesting that the CHA had created a “parallel magisterium” to the bishops, and asserting that a meeting between CHA officials and three bishops appointed by George had “frustrating results.”
In a June 21 posting on the blog of the bishops’ conference, Helen Osman, Secretary of Communications for the conference, asserted that those quotations are “just wrong.” Osman said she was in the room during the discussion, and that she had checked an audio file of the meeting to confirm her memory.
“There’s certainly plenty of disagreement between the bishops and the Catholic health care organizations regarding the implications of the health care legislation,” Osman wrote. “But to confuse the situation with quotes that aren’t true is just plain dishonest.”
Subscribe to NCR
Want to read more about important issues in the life of the Church? A subscription to NCR will keep you up to date and informed.
Osman also criticized CNN for an on-line report based in part on the CNA story. A June 16 story from CNN.com combined elements from my report and the CNA story under the headline, “Bishops’ conference blasts nuns for health care endorsement.”
Osman said it was a “huge and erroneous assumption” to frame the health care debate as a standoff between the bishops and sisters.
In reply to Osman’s post, CNA posted an item the same day saying the agency “stands by its report,” asserting that it had been corroborated by “several bishops.” Alejandro Bermudez, editor of the CNA, called upon Osman to release the audio file of the St. Petersburg discussion “to see who is right,” calling her post “disturbing, dishonest and unfairly selective.”
In her posting, Osman said the conference would not release the audio file in order “to honor the bishops’ privacy and confidentiality.”
* * *
In the CNA reply to Osman, Bermudez also refers to my interview with George as “validating” the agency’s report, based on quotations published in my June 16 article. Because that interview has become relevant not only to the tensions between the bishops and the CHA, but also those between the conference and the Catholic News Agency, I am posting here the full text of the conversation. It took place by telephone on the morning of June 16.
* * *
Interview with Cardinal Francis George
June 16, 2010
What’s at stake in the tension between the bishops and the CHA?
A central point seems to be the idea that making a judgment about a law is a purely political matter in which the bishops shouldn’t be involved, and ultimately I don’t think that can be sustained. If the bishops have a right and a duty to teach that killing the unborn is immoral, they also have to teach that laws which permit and fund abortion are immoral. That’s clear in Evangelium Vitae and the whole corpus of Catholic social teaching. Law is normative. It talks about what is right and wrong to do, at least legally, and so it enters into a moral universe.
Where someone draws the line on what the bishops ought to say, I think, often depends on where they’re coming from politically. As you know, some argued that the bishops shouldn’t be saying that health care reform is a moral imperative – that this was a political question in which we shouldn’t be involved. Striking the right balance is a pastoral challenge, and I think we tried to do our best to stay on the level of principle, without getting into the arcane policy details which are not our prerogative.
The principle involved in the health care debate is that a good society is one in which everybody is cared for, and nobody is deliberately killed. Once you get into that, you have to look at the way the law is written, which in this case focused on insurance. That’s not the only way to guarantee care, but it’s how this law is crafted. The Hyde Amendment stipulated that the federal government will not fund insurance policies that provide abortion, and our concern was to be sure the same protection was in this bill.
The CHA’s argument is that they’re not questioning your right to offer moral judgments about law. Instead, they’re saying that you’re wrong about what this law contains.
I can see that there could be a question about the empirical content of the law, and different lawyers have said different things. So far, nobody has answered the objections raised by Anthony Picarello, the bishops’ counsel, in his letter to America magazine [an edited version of the letter appeared in the May 17 issue of America; the full text is available on the USCCB web site]. What worries me more than a difference over empirical content, however, is the claim that the bishops cannot speak to the moral content of the law. That seems to be what the CHA has said, though I’d be happy to be proven wrong.
Are you hopeful about overcoming the rift with the CHA?
Yes, I am. I’ve written to Sr. Carol [Keehan, president of the CHA], and I want us to try to reshape the relationship in dialogue together. The bishops have to protect their role to govern the church, but within that, there are lots of conversation places. As part of that conversation, we have to clarify the claims being made, primarily on this question of our role in assessing the moral quality of law, because it affects every area we touch on. For example, it affects our discussion of immigration. Are we supposed to just say that the present situation is morally unjustified, or do we have the right and the duty to make moral judgments about whatever legislation comes down the line?
Is it possible that the CHA will face disciplinary measures?
I’m not sure what that would look like, because we haven’t talked about it as a conference. In any event, the disciplinary code of the church is actually quite restricted. The Code of Canon Law was revised under John Paul II, and I think he had seen the misuse of administrative penalties in Communist countries and didn’t want the church’s code misused in the same way.
Are you hoping that things never get to that stage because efforts at dialogue bear fruit?
Of course. We’re dealing with people of good will here, so dialogue should be possible.
Can you say anything about your discussion in St. Petersburg on the health care reform debate?
This assembly is basically a retreat, so the discussion took up less than an hour at the beginning. Some bishops gave a report on the dialogue as it went along, and we talked about some policies. That’s really all we did – there were no resolutions or decisions.
Earlier in the year you appointed Bishops Kevin Vann, Thomas Paprocki and Kevin Rhoades to meet with the leadership of the CHA. Do you see that group as the vehicle to carry the dialogue forward?
It would be the normal vehicle for that to happen, or the dialogue could go into some existing body within the conference, such as the domestic policy committee. We have to talk about which way is better, and perhaps the CHA will have some impression of which is better. I think the group [composed of the three bishops and three officials from CHA] has proven itself to be helpful, but we’ll have to see whether they want to continue.
From your point of view, is this ultimately an ecclesiological question – who speaks for the church?
Yes, exactly. Our disagreement may be narrow, but it’s a narrow difference that has exposed a very large principle. It affects the nature of the church, and therefore it has to concern the bishops.
I know this comparison may seem dramatic, but a few years ago Cardinal von Galen of Munster [Germany] was beatified. Under the Nazis, von Galen not only condemned euthanasia as an unethical procedure, but he also condemned the laws which permitted it. Today we think of him as a hero, and rightly so. This is the question that has to be raised: Are we to offer moral teaching solely about actions, or also the laws which permit and foster them?
Where do you see potential for putting the relationship between the bishops and the CHA back on solid footing?
One immediate area of possible collaboration is the effort to put the language of the Hyde Amendment back into the law, now that we actually have a law. If we can jointly support that change to the law, it would go a long way toward fostering reconciliation.
Memo to USCCB: Get back to
Memo to USCCB:
Get back to your games of MUSICAL CHAIRS!
Cardinal George has
Cardinal George has identified the big IF that will tell whether the CHA is acting in good faith or setting itself up as a parallel Magisterium. IF CHA supports the effort to put the language of the Hyde Amnendment back into the law, now that we actually have a law, it would go a long way toward fostering reconciliation.
I cannot believe the Rush Limbaugh-reversed quality of some of the comments on NCR's website. Number 1: I cannot believe that the sexual abuse crisis justifies asserting that the Bishops no longer have moral authority. Even if they were all abusers or complicit in protecting abusers, they would remain successors of the Apostles, though hypocritical, Pharisaical ones. Remember that Jesus did not teach disregard of the Pharisees. He said, in fact, "The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. Therefore whatever they tell you to observe, that observe and do, but do not do according to their works; for they say, and do not do..." (Matthew 23:1). Number 2: I cannot believe the inability of commenters to see what chaos would ensue if every person was his or her own moral authority. One has only to look at the Civil War splits within Protestant denominations over the issue of slavery for an example of that. Number 3: I cannot believe that bishops themselves and reputable scholars like Bryan Hehir are saying the bishops have no right to speak about matters of law. Cardinal George has it right when he points out that such a rule would have prohibited Cardinal Von Galen from speaking out against the laws permitting the holocaust. Number 4: I cannot believe the assertions that the bishops tried to write this law. They specifically eschewed doing that, limiting themselve to moral input about what it should contain and a moral judgment that the finished product was lacking and should either be fixed or opposed. Now they are working with Congressmen to fix it, still not dictating the means of doing that. Number 5: I don't understand why people keep saying they don't trust the bishops but do trust the sisters. What specifically have the sisters done to deserve more trust than the bishops? Abuses like the recent starvation and dehydration death of a man in St. Mary's Hospital, San Francisco, run by the Sisters of Mercy under the auspices of Catholic Health West, affiliated with the CHA, while his family had to look on helplessly because the ethics committee could not convene on a weekend, are proof to me that they are not. For more information on that incident: http://iteamblog.abc7news.com/2010/06/hospital-accused-lack-of-care.html
As for the press reports' being inaccurate, the transcript of the CNA interview looks real to me, but I won't be able to judge correctly unless Cardinal George speaks out clearly regarding the interview and the discussion at the bishops' meeting or the sound recording of the meeting is released. I understand the USCCB's desire not to do or say anything that will set back the necessary dialogue with CHA, but I can't help but contrast their secrecy regarding the recording with the divisive public remarks of Bishop Lynch, which made the disagreement within the conference itself apparent to everyone in case it wasn't already. It is most important that these disagreements be hashed out and a united teaching position articulated for Catholics and the general public. If anything needed to be kept secret it was this internal dissension. Good people can disagree, but in the end we are called to unity under the authority of the Bishops, no one else. Perhaps an idea considered dissent now will later be accepted. In the meantime, we bow to the need for unity in the tradtion of Teilhard de Chardin, John Courtney Murray, etc., who obeyed their superiors' commands to be silent and were later rehabilitated.
An apology for writing
An apology for writing earlier that the transcript that looked real to me was from a CNA interview, when in fact it was from an interview John Allen had with Cardinal George on June 16. Of course the transcript is real. We still await the release of the recording of the bishops' discussion to see whether the statement issued by the USCCB was accurate. Whether or not it was seems fairly irrelevant. Cardinal George's remarks to John support my comment, which I intended to express my agreement with the Cardinal on the need for Church unity under the authority of the bishops and especially in his challenge to the CHA to join the fight to amend the health care reform bill so that it meets the criteria of helping everyone and killing no one. When the Hyde Amendment language has been added to the bill, there will still be much to fix, such as conscience protection, the rights of immigrants, and the elephant in the room, the possibility of abuse of the elderly and disabled through deprivation of needed and ordinary medical care or through subtle pressure to "choose" to die by rejecting such care or committing physician assisted suicide, all this done and accepted, like tax-payer funding of abortion, in the name of some "greater good".
1) Bishops teach and preach
1) Bishops teach and preach and otherwise articulate the magisterium. The scandal of episcopal secrecy that sitting bishops, and their predecessors, participated in as the response to clerics and other church workers raping and otherwise sexually molesting children and young people does not in itself negate the role of bishop. However, it is a reminder to the laity that the deposit of the faith belongs to the whole Church and thus the laity must exercise its responsibilty for what clerics say and do and the consequences thereof. It is the responsibility of the laity to ensure that the bishops do not overstep their vocational boundaries into the laity's vocation. The laity are called to holiness not to mindlessness.
3)In the end only Archbishop Francis seems to think that anyone objects to bishops teaching and preaching and even articulating concerns about laws or legislation. In large part this is not the case. The Von Galen example is less apt when one considers 3 points: A)The Catholic Laity's work in social justice and politics was efficiently and effectively hamstrunged by Pacelli's Concordat (Vatican's Concordat with Hitler's Reich: http://www.americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=3131). This means that the Catholic laity could not easily speak out against the Nazi party. B)The same Concordat offered the clergy a level of protection that the laity did not have when critizing the Nazis. C) Von Galen critiqued and even ridiculed various Nazi laws for the cause of goodness, but no one has indicated that he himself was personally involved in legislative processes that resulted in a German law being passed or promulgated.
4)'Writing Law' in common parlance includes anyone of the following, or a combination of the following:
1)submitting text of proposed legislation in writing
2)submitting text of proposed admendments
3)submitting verbal or written critiques containing specific proposed changes forlegislation
4)being part of discussions the goal of which is that someone else pens proposed changes and / or otherwise causes or influences changes in proposed legislation.
5)Trust is part of the context. Trust is earned by the holders of an office, though usually the laity extend trust to a bishop as a matter of course. However this is not a case of sisters having earnned more trust. Rather the issue is that the laity are co-responsible for the Church. Even if the bishops act in a way that is contrary to their vocation, the laity must live their own vocation and continue to strive for holiness by teaching and preaching the Good News by their lives, and actions.
I fully agree with
I fully agree with "Anonymous".I would just add that Bishop Graf von Galen did not
protest the holocaust but the practice of euthanisia as stated by Artmis3.
No opinion John???
No opinion John???
I think its time for the
I think its time for the Church to rid itself of the misogyny it has kept down through the centuries and begin to look at women and their gifts (besides being able to conceive and give birth physically) and to honor them as equal human and spiritual beings. For me, when the bishops speak whether in conference or not, it is only half the Church speaking, and I tend to half-listen. I do not believe that women cannot be ordained; I know what a couple of past Popes said, but I disagree with them whole heartedly. As long as women are refused ordination in the Roman Catholic Church they will be treated as lesser and different having no authority of their own, and having no authority of their own, how can they then be considered equals to the male bishops, etc. With the Aids epidemic raging in 3rd World Countries, and war and terrorist tactics killing and raping woman and children daily, there is a lot more to be considered than the single issue of abortion. I do not condone abortion, its heinious; but what do the bishops have to offer to those poor womean and children in 3rd World Countries who are physically and psychically devastated?
Thanks, Patricia, I couldn't
Thanks, Patricia, I couldn't agree more!
Patricia, Please read this
Patricia,
Please read this article, as it may clear up some of your concerns about women in the church.
http://marysaggies.blogspot.com/2010/06/why-cant-women-be-priests.html
Patricia, please read this
Patricia,
please read this article as it may clear up some of your concerns regarding women and their role in the Church.
http://marysaggies.blogspot.com/2010/06/why-cant-women-be-priests.html
The bishops should be
The bishops should be preaching the Gospel not the advice of their legal counsel. Follow the teaching model of Benedict rather than Anthony Picarello.
Weel said, Bertone.
Weel said, Bertone.
Maybe reading the Gospels and
Maybe reading the Gospels and especially reflecting on the second reading for the 11th Sunday in Ordinary Time...Galatians 2:16, 19-21 would clear some cluttered minds. "...because by words of the law, no one will be justified. For through the law I died to the law, that I might live for God. I have been crucified with Christ, yet I live, no longer I, but Christ lives in me:insofar as I now live in the flesh, I live by faith in the Son of God who has loved me and given himself up for me. I do not nullify the grace of God; for if justification comes through the law, then Christ died for nothing.
Benedict XVI told the bishops
Benedict XVI told the bishops of Brazil this week that their most important tasks are celebrating Mass and ensuring that all people can attend the Eucharist, especially on Sundays.
If our bishops made the Eucharist their priority, they would change the face of the Church in the United States.
No question but that now is
No question but that now is time for a return to the rule of Law, considering the abuse of the Law by our past president, so fondly endorsed by the Catholic Hierarchy. The perception of the bishop as heavy handed governor of the diocesan flock,rather than teacher and shepherd emerges out of all too many embarrassing pronouncements and actions. Having followed the career of Cardinal George and witnessed his command of Church theology and skillful administration of Portland and Chicago, it is sad to see him boxed in as an enforcer as Chair of the USCCB.
Unfortunately, the "Rule of
Unfortunately, the "Rule of Law" has been obliterated by Scalia, the SCOTUS and the Republican party(Cons, Neocons, Theocons), and deliberately so.. Scalia first ended the Rule of Law when he engineered the hanging chads debacle in the election of 2000, despite his Republicans who are always screaming about "states rights".
Scalia gave a private speech in May, 2000. In it, he called for the "end to the rule of law in America", he also called for "the 'end to democracy in America".
Scalia and his SCOTUS next damaged the Rule of Law when he/they ruled this past January giving BIG Corporations the freedom to spend unlimited amounts of money on political candidates of their choosing. The GOP defense of that ruling is that unions can do the same thing. But they cannot because they do not have anywhere near that amount of money. That ruling ended 100yrs of precedence. It also ends our democracy because it is based on having "two equally powerful political parties" that "we the people" can choose and/or change our choosings, from time to time. Thus keeping political parties in power and responsive to "we the people", not to BIG Corporations and the very few super rich, the 1%. BTW, this is exactly how the Latin countries are ruled and controlled.
Unless Obama can do something spectacular and capture the hearts and minds of the voters, who are now after GWB, totally disgusted with gov't, there will never be another Dem elected to the presidency. Likely, a lot of Congressional seats will be lost as well. And the Rethugs are totally dedicated to Obama's failing.
With unions gone, families are gone. So much for Pro-life and Family Values!!!
Very soon, BIG Corporations and BIG Religion will turn our democracy into a Fascist Theocracy, not unlike Iran.
"I know this comparison may
"I know this comparison may seem dramatic, but a few years ago Cardinal von Galen of Munster [Germany] was beatified. Under the Nazis, von Galen not only condemned euthanasia as an unethical procedure, but he also condemned the laws which permitted it. Today we think of him as a hero, and rightly so. This is the question that has to be raised: Are we to offer moral teaching solely about actions, or also the laws which permit and foster them?"
The problem is, Cardinal George does not speak for all Catholics, he speaks for himself & the Republican Party who don't mind insurance companies making huge windfall profits off of the sick while the sick either die due to lack of care or coverage or go bankrupt to pay the hospital bills. Wouldn't it be wiser to get rid of the laws that allow insurance companies & hospitals to bilk us, decide the fate of our health care & whether or not we live in a house or a tent after such "care"?
Insurance companies have been euthanizing people for years with their policies that deny coverage, minimize coverage or make it too costly to be cared for. Cardinal George does not seem to mind though that many are euthanized via the health care system itself.
The drama we Catholics need is not of the type that Cardinal George seems to think we need. I only wish that Cardinal George would condemn the insurance companies administrative euthanasia as an unethical procedure and condemn the administrative insurance laws which permit it because too many deaths are occurring because of it.
While Cardinal George is burying himself in this issue, there are not enough doctors or hospitals to care for people. Want to be a hero CG? Then become a doctor and don't charge anything for your services. That would really be dramatic!!!
If Cardinal George were a doctor and I was pregnant, my life would be euthanized if it was a risky pregnancy. I have no doubt that he would give preference to the fetus. I am against such laws that Cardinal George prefers and I pay taxes, but Cardinal George does not. Who should have the say about the laws in this country? Who should have a say in matters that are none of Cardinal George's business? Not Cardinal George and not the Catholic Church either.
As a former Religious Sister,
As a former Religious Sister, and a former Catholic, I fully support the Catholic Hospital Association over the "OLD BOY'S CLUB OF ROME", and their puppets the Catholic Bishops in the U.S.A. ROME is a Patriarchal BOY's CLUB, who have been a CULT ever since ROME took Christianity into their Power Structure a few hundred years after the death of the man "Jesus Christ". ROME saw that this new band of Christians, was growing and that it would provide good results to bring Christianity into the Roman Empire in order to have MORE POWER over the world. So the Christians agreed to take on some of the Pagan Roman celebrations, like Easter, and Christmas.
My point in this brief historical expos, is to let ROME know that many of us Catholics and former Catholics in the United States, are beyond believing in ROME as having any POWER. Infallibility is a joke! It is what CULT's use to have power over the people.
In conclusion, ROME, and the U.S. Catholic Bishops.....you have NO POWER. So spew all the excommunications and nonsense that you wish, and more than a few Catholics,priests and nuns in the U.S.A. just ignore YOU. bye bye!
Gardy
Come home to the Church with
Come home to the Church with all of it's faults. The faults are with the individuals but not with the Bride of Christ nor Her doctrine.
Cardinal George is confusing
Cardinal George is confusing MORAL advocacy with POLITICAL advocacy. All Catholics, clergy, lay, or religious, have an obligation to engage in moral advocacy. It is not for bishops, however, to cross the line into political advocacy, misusing their episcopal office to promote or oppose specific bills.
Cardinal George said in the interview that "If the bishops have a right and a duty to teach that killing the unborn is immoral, they also have to teach that laws which permit and fund abortion are immoral." I wholeheartedly agree. To "teach that laws which permit and fund abortion are immoral" it is not necessary for bishops to push for or advocate against certain bills. Explain to Catholics "that laws which permit and fund abortion are immoral" and tell them why, but don't go beyond that. Whenever a bishop does cross that line and enter into political activity, he moves outside of the boundaries of his episcopal authority, and Catholics owe him no more obedience or respect than they do any other politician.
Cardinal George is definitely
Cardinal George is definitely playing the role of politician and member of the upper crust clergy who live in ivory towers. The Cardinal states as quoted, "The principle involved in the health care debate is that a good society is one in which everybody is cared for, and nobody is deliberately killed." If Cardinal George ended his comment with everybody is cared for, then we would all be on the same page.
The Hyde amendment whether it was passed or not should have had nothing to do with the passage of the Health Care Bill in the US. American clergy turned a well thought out health care bill into a moral issue circus, trying to overturn Roe vs. Wade at the same time.
Give us all a break and listen to your Catholic population! We are certainly a whole lot more intelligent then you give us credit sirs. You were never elected as politicians, so please keep your collective mouths out of the laws of this nation.
Almost every day, I wonder
Almost every day, I wonder why they(Cardinal George and his hiearchs) never said anything when GWB killed Iraqis for their oil and for oil company profits until long after the war was started, it was proven there was no WMD and nothing could be done. I guess everyone is cared for but Muslims and us libs who refuse to accept the Republican Friedman-Reagan economics policies and politics.
And then they dare to scream about Pro-life and Family Values. They are riven with hypocrisy, greed and their endless lust for power.
Do you care for those who are
Do you care for those who are not yet born? It is not a matter of politics but one of justice.
I have an idea to pose to the
I have an idea to pose to the bishops. Since they are so adamant about excluding abortion from national health care, then simply open all catholic hospitals to offer free delivery and follow-up, no questions asked. Wouldn't this be putting their money where their mouths mostly are.
Here is an idea for the
Here is an idea for the bishops. Simply offer free delivery and follow-up services to anyone considering an abortion, no questions asked. Wouldn't this be putting money where the bishops mouths mostly are?
Don't stop there. If they
Don't stop there. If they wanted to put their money where their mouths were, the anti-choice Catholics would be supporting these "unborn" throughout their whole lives -- housing, food, clothing, education -- plus all the costs for many who will survive with special needs (24-hour nursing services, tutors, physical and mental therapy, etc.). Better still, adopt a dozen or so special needs children and support them 24-7 throughout their lives. The only anti-abortion people I know who have any credibility whatsoever are those who have done just that. Otherwise, it's just jaws flapping in the wind.
I think the bishops have done
I think the bishops have done a lot to destroy any magesterium the Church possesses in the last quarter century.
Most Catholics have minimal direct contact with Bishops. Even if a lay person tries to follow their pronouncements, they're rarely written for the laity.
In contrast, the average catholic has hundreds of hours of contact with nuns. Our memories of them are of self sacrifice and service. If the question is administrative authority to speak for the Church, then the Bishops will win.
If the question is who will the laity listen to, the sisters will win every time.
John L, AMEN brother.
John L,
AMEN brother. Very,very well said. I totally agree. Hurt the good nuns and they hurt me, and all of us. The nuns are the people, the body of the faithful, not the hierarchy.
The hierarchy lost their magisterium when they stopped following the Laws of God(Ten Commandments) and the teachings of Jesus Christ("Render unto Caesar...). They lost their magisterium, their credibility, when they decided to become a political organization, beginning under Emporer Constantine, and despite the fact that Jesus said: "Render unto Caesar....
They lost their magisterium when they hated and killed Jews, Muslims, Protestants and even other Catholics such as Eastern Rite Catholics. They lost their magisterium when they denied God's world by denying the facts that Galileo and Copernicus clearly demonstrated. They lost their magisterium when they aligned with Hitler, the Nazis and the Fascists. They lost their magisterium when they aligned with Reagan, Bush, Bush and the GOP.
They lost their magisterium when they began their hate(Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, Jerome, Ambrose, et.al)toward women during the first 100-150yrs of the Church. Women are half of the human race, half of God's creation, The Family of Man.
How can there be any magisterium left when their debauchery of children and their adherence to Republican Reagan-Milton Friedman economics and the politics of the super rich and their BIG Corporations???
Blessings to you and yours---
bob
How sad. You must be a
How sad. You must be a fallen away Catholic too! Pray in front of Jesus in the Eucharist and come home buddy.
I cannot support those who
I cannot support those who have either lost the faith or those who do not seem to understand basic moral theology Proportionalism (more folks will benefit) does not lessen the need to fight for the dignity of ALL life--even unborn. Those who think the present government is there to protect life have been deceived. We can look to the socialized medicine in the UK and Canada. There will be panals who will deem what is cost effective and what not. Millions of dollars to the abortion industry will indeed come from taxes because abortions are cheaper than to support a life.
The renegade religious sisters and politicians cause great scandal. The man in the white house gives them a pen! And there is brilliance in the appointing of dissenting Catholics to high positions to keep the church divided as if 45 years of little and no catechesis has not done the job.
The religious sister who is head of the CHA draws a huge salary. Is it all just turned over to the order? Money money money. Yes, money is needed to run hospitals but if the cost comes from lives and souls of others, it is too high a cost.
Liberalism ends in atheism.
As to women with gifts---it seems the whining is about power. Women do indeed have many gifts yet radical feminism has turned mothers against their own children and their own motherhood. It is stealing our true feminism away. If God wanted me to be His priest, He would have created me a man. He did not.
The priesthood is not about power and authority; it is the giving of one's whole life to God and souls. It is a life of sacrifice. A woman has never and will never be a true priest to offer the Holyl Sacrifice. Sure she can be 'ordained' in some other religion or one of her making but she will never confect the Eucharist nor absolve sin. She can go 'preside' over liturgy somewhere and call herself whatever she wants but she is not obedient, nor humble, nor a priest.
Magdelene If liberalism ends
Magdelene
If liberalism ends in atheism ... then ... (your brand of) CONSERVATISM ENDS IN SLAVERY!!
Liberalism is a blessing by comparison.
Patriarchalism in the RCC is more extreme in its choking "radical masculinism than feminism could dream of being. Patriarchalism in the RCC segregates and subjugates women from the corridors of power. Feminism asks for inclusion.
Gender has nothing to do with God's call to Priesthood. God can call anyone God wants. Human powers can't stop Him tho they try.
I am sorry you have been so deluded against your own gender. You have internalized a teaching about yourself as a woman that is not correct and serves quite well to keep you unquestioningly out of the Priesthood and supportive of the boys. Obviously patriarchs love it when they can ensure women will denigrate other women who attempt to rise further than patriarchal cheerleaders.
BTW how would you know God never called you to Priesthood if you never listend to God's call, thinking it was not possible, because you believe humans can limit God not vice versa?
As to women with gifts they're not whining. However, in many areas they are winning. They are winning the hearts and minds of the middle class and poor whom they have championed in Christ's name. They are winning by a spiritural courage that selflessly speaks truth to power so that the circle that allows a decent and healthful standard of living for everyone is widened.
Give up your Mysogomist,
Give up your Mysogomist, Patriarchal beliefs that women, nuns are not obedient nor humble, nor a priest IF THEY offer the Holy Sacrifice. I find it most amusing that males in all levels of society are fearing the POWER OF WOMEN.....who happen to be much more reasonable, thoughtful, self-sacrificing, compassionate that the OLD BOYS CLUB with their CULT. Men keep your opinions and hands off of women's bodies and spirits.......unless you can do so respectfully recognizing that Women are the one's who are the only persons who can make a choice about their own bodies. It appears to me that the Catholic Church protects the life of the unborn, only to then ADVOCATE the crazy notion that there is such a THING as a Just War to kill those babies who have been born and grown into men, women and children. Once alive, persons are fair game for the KILLING FIELDS. I fail to find the logic in this. Furthermore, the Death Penalty is also promoted by the Catholic BOYS CLUB......and they have killed thousands over the years and during the middle ages were burning men and women and chopping off their heads at will. And now they have the AUDACITY to say a woman has no choice over her body if she finds herself pregnant by anything from RAPE INCEST, etc.
Gardy
'There will be panals who
'There will be panals who will deem what is cost effective and what not.'
This is paranoid rubbish spread by dishonest ideologues - I have ived in the UK and it does not happen. And in any case the private insurers in the US have been doing this for years - not to mention that secularised and bastardised form of divine providence of Adam Smith's invisible hand of the market. Or is it somehow OK if the private sector and the free market do it?
Of course it's better because
Of course it's better because then folks like the above commenter can invest their money in these for profit insurance companies and pad their retirement accounts on the dividends generated by insurance company decisions which result in no treatment for their fellow Catholics.
Profit potential is always preferable to government insured care. That's what this health care bs is in a nutshell. The idea is profit for a few on the misery of the many is God's preferred method of wealth distribution. The real problem with government health care is it amounts to a death panel for the health industry profit margin.
On the Feast of Saint John
On the Feast of Saint John Fisher bishops are finally waking up and siding with the Truth and the Church, and not worrying about being "nice."
"On the Feast of Saint John
"On the Feast of Saint John Fisher bishops are finally waking up and siding with the Truth and the Church, and not worrying about being "nice." "
Sort of like Vatican zombies spoon-fed by Opus Dei, they are "finally waking up" like Frankenstein did with jolts of electricity called fascist zombie truthism, that never worries about being "nice." Apparently, never worries about being Christ-like or Jesus centered either......
The Republican party cannot
The Republican party cannot claim it fights for life or any aspect of Pro-life and Family Values when it kills for profits(oil) Iraq and throughout Latin American countries. The Vatican's Pro-life and Family Values claim is also destroyed because they keep the Repubs in power. Does Karl Rove and Frank Luntz write your specious arguments.
Your entire argument is destroyed!!!
"The CHA’s argument is that
"The CHA’s argument is that they’re not questioning your right to offer moral judgments about law. Instead, they’re saying that you’re wrong about what this law contains." And they can raise their questions, issues, objections and concerns. But when the bishops give a directive and teaching, then they should forever hold their peace or keep follow up comments in private. Their public dissent and contradiction to the bishops is unconscionable because they are nuns and because they have no right to do that. These nuns think they can speak for the Church. So, they offer an alternate teaching. And the media whores quickly pick up on the scandal that they're causing. They're applying American principles of independence and feminism in places where those do not apply. The community of faith is not a democracy even if they want to make it such and have themselves voted into power. The community of believers are not independent from their traditional and historical origins and an American revolution will not change that nature. But deluded with their degrees and having too much time in their hands plus the limelight of a secular press, these women forge on and wound the very people that they pretend to serve.
Ricky Vines, the right to
Ricky Vines, the right to think, the right to vote, the right to lobby in the halls of our government is not contained or reserved for Bishops only. Because we are Catholics we do not forfeit our rights as citizens or forfeit our rights to think.
Your comment completely obliterates the notion of freedom of conscience and liberty for anyone but the Bishops. It also completely obliterates the rights of citizens & Catholics to lobby or vote if it is different than how the Bishops would dictate you to vote or lobby. You are saying that Catholics cannot have a different political outlook or perspective that is different in any way to the Bishops, even if it may be blessed by the Holy Spirit. You are saying all are in dissent if they do not agree with the Bishops all the time. One would have to be so politically immature & historically backward or ignorant or just plain stupid to allow anyone to control one's very conscience and decision making capabilities. Your views simply make us all slaves and not free in Christ.
The USCCB in its stance has no right to say that any group of people who do not agree with them are less Catholic than them, or less American than they, and have no right in the USA to be dictating politics to anyone! If they are, then the RCC should lose its tax exempt status as it is no longer a religious organization because it has crossed the line into being a political one and a tyrannical one.
You are confusing your Faith with being a tool built for making a political machine out of our religion. You are using your Faith for a political agenda to deny others their rights to speak out in dissent or in any kind of disagreement to the religious or political views of the Bishops. That is not being religious. It is being political. It is not being spiritual because it has nothing to do with the teachings of Jesus Christ.
I would give the bishops the
I would give the bishops the benefit of the doubt instead of dismissing them as being manipulated by a political party. Docility to their teachings is not being a tool but rather having my faith realized in practical actions. In case you forgot, this is the Catholic Church not some Protestant denomination where the community of faith accept the Magisterium, the teaching office bestowed upon the Apostles and their successors. You are free to reject that just as you are free to leave the Church. Furthermore, faith and docility is not blind as the bishops have done due diligence and presented issues about the funding of abortion which up to now have not been responded to in a satisfactory manner. When it comes to morals, there is no pluralism or diversity in the Catholic Church. You may want to check out the Anglicans because they permit that in their Church.
Just pull all the Catholic
Just pull all the Catholic Hospitals, and Nursing Homes out of the CHA. Leave them an empty shell with nothing to fret about, and no one to get money from.
Form a new organization with those who follow the teachings of the Church.
I don't care if they get excommunicated.
Enough is enough.
4 More Good reasons why I
4 More Good reasons why I Stopped reading the "National(so called)Catholic Reporter".(1)The New York Times,(2)The Huffinton Post,(3)The Salon.com,and Last but not least(4)The Nation.Has got to be something about NCR that's Against Jesus and His Church having those 4 approving of it's magazine,what a Shame.Respectfully with Love,Joseph J. Pippet
Patricia, please read this
Patricia,
please read this article as it may clear up some of your concerns regarding women and their role in the Church.
http://marysaggies.blogspot.com/2010/06/why-cant-women-be-priests.html
George & Rome are vile!!!
George & Rome are vile!!! When will 'the faithful' stop giving this corrupt church their dollars?
What is the source of our
What is the source of our faith? Praise be to our Lord Jesus Christ now and for evermore. I am often left wondering, if some of the contributors in NCR articles are Christians, let alone Catholics. There is so much hate, anger and name calling that comes out their comments, that one wonders what the purpose is.
For example, the self Identified "former Religious Sister and former Catholic". What is such a person doing in a suposed Catholic site and commenting hateful and silly name calling rantings. Also the individual called "Sweet Anonymos". When issues like this that really concerns our Church is on the line, one would expect honest and realistic contributions and not the so much hate and antagonism of the Bishops that is usually refelceted in the response to NCR articles.
It is a mind bogling issue for me, when I read articles from NCR and some contributors, exploring Catholic Doctrine and teachings. All I often hear is "Oh the World has moved on", "The Society has changed" and "This is the 21st Century", therefore the Catholic Church has to update her teachings. When I hear this, I want to weep, because I wonder if these people, some of who claim to be theologians, actually think about what they are saying.
For all I care, the society can change and change, it can be the 50th century or whatever. For the Record, I was taught in my cathecism by my revered nuns that as Catholics, our faith is handed down to us on the pillars of "Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition". What simple and non-theologian Catholics like me would love to hear is how the issues that these theologian critics oppose in Church teaching, are against scripture and tradition and how their proposals are in line with the Scripture and Tradition. Instead what the go around saying is that Catholic teaching is not aligned with modern thought. I would love to have an honest response to this issue.
Last week, the controversial Fr. Charles Curren said in Newsweek that the problem with the Catholic Church is that her teaching is outdated and does not meet up with modern standards and so the church needs to update her teachings so as to align with modern thought. It was so sad to hear a Priest of God saying this, without making any reference to the scriptures to prove his point. His only concern is modern thought. Are we now dependent on modern ideas or should we tell the world and especially fellow Catholics what we believe, based on the sources of our faith? These something worth thinking about.
Recently I read a very disturbing comment in the website of the LCWR one of the groups that represent some of the groups of religious women in our country. If I am correct, this is a website for some of our nuns. In a record of a presentation given, on the state of religious sisters, A sister is quoted to say that, some of the nuns "have gone beyond the Jesus narrative" and now embrassing other truths. What on earth can be more tragic for a Christian than these. Yet these are they people who will criticise the church for not listening to them.
The Catholic Church is not a political or social organization or institution. Until we return to the basics of our faith, I feel we will continue to fight and name-call each other. We are allowing secular and pegan ideas and thoughts to influence us. Until we begin to articulate our faith in line with the scriptures and traditions that our fathers and mothers in the faith handed down to us, we will continue to be at odds with each other. May God bless us all.
You are very mistaken
You are very mistaken Cynthia. You have entirely missed my point. Sorry you feel the way you do.
There is not a shred of hatred for the Bishop. The Bishop's idea of euthanasia and where it is truly taking place, in insurance company's policies, is not focused on where it ought to be.
You say, "The Catholic Church is not a political or social organization or institution." That is certainly not true at all and I wonder where you get the idea that it is not? What then would you define as "political" or "social organization" or "institution."??? Is the Bishop not involved with deciding the laws of the USA with regards to health care reform? You believe that is not being political? Does he not then also communicate the "institutions" desires to the "social organization" the members of the Church, and of which is also as a whole body a pretty big political block? The bulletins and flyers from Bishop's offices are not political? They are looking out for our interest? If I disagree with the Bishop that makes me not a Catholic all of a sudden? That's not political?
It's all political. Bishops, if they truly represented Jesus Christ, then why are they not healing anybody? Why are they a lobby group in Washington instead? Answer that one honestly.
I do agree with this for all Christians & Catholics, including Bishops and priests - "Until we return to the basics of our faith" ....... "Until we begin to articulate our faith in line with the scriptures" ...... "we will continue to be at odds with each other."
May God bless us all Cynthia, to follow Jesus - Jesus the Healer, the Teacher, the Prophet, the Head of the Church. Once you lop the Head of Christ off the Church and give the power and authority over to men, the Church no longer resembles what Jesus gave us. We do need to return to the basics of our faith.
BTW, the boys running the Church are running it into the ground. No need to blame it on the poor Sisters. Yes, if only the boys would listen to the girls. After all, Jesus sure did. That's one of the first basic things to understand from the scriptures. Jesus never failed to listen to the women and never failed to teach them either.
Don't underestimate the power of God to bring the glory of God through women. After all, Mary shows us that too.
A woman in a chasuble and
A woman in a chasuble and stole is a cross-dresser. Women will never be validly ordained, period.
"A woman in a chasuble and
"A woman in a chasuble and stole is a cross-dresser. Women will never be validly ordained, period."
Hahahaha!!! You are so funny!! Hysterically funny!
Just look at the Pope. He is a transvestite cross-dresser. You'd have to be blind to not notice it. Take the blinders off and you will see.
A woman in a chasuble and
A woman in a chasuble and stole is a cross-dresser. Women will never be validly ordained, period.
huh? what is a man in a
huh? what is a man in a dress?
I think research should be
I think research should be done to show that priests who ascend to the ban on women's ordination invalidate their own ordination.
By virtue of usurping the gender inclusive kingdom of God and substituting it for a man-only contrived principality the image of Christ in the RC Priesthood is emptied of vital content.
The exhortation in Galatians ... in Christ their is no male or female all are one in Christ Jesus ... is directly foundational yet profoundly and sinfully disregarded by the RCC.
This crop of very
This crop of very conservative bishops is doing its best to undo all the good that Vatican II accomplished. With the case of the Daughter of Charity Sister in Denver being hounded by her action to allow a very sick woman to have an abortion is one indication of how far these bishops are reaching. Years ago, when I was a student at a Daughter of Charity School of Nursing, we had an Ethics class taught by a priest/monsignor. He absolutely pounded into our heads the "Principal of the Double Effect", which he said basically meant that doctors could perform an abortion to save the life of a very sick mother. And anyone with pulmonary hypertension is a very sick person. She will probably be a candidate for a lung transplant sometime or another. Her body very likely could not bear the strain of an advancing pregnancy and, as a result, both mom and baby would die. Is that what Bishop George thinks is the right thing? Just one more indication of how the Church today sees women--as second-class citizens. Bobbie
Bobbie said:""Principal of
Bobbie said:""Principal of the Double Effect", which he said basically meant that doctors could perform an abortion to save the life of a very sick mother."
I see why your confused. Your description is not the "Principal of Double Effect". This principal actually allows for a medical procedure to save a mother's life and if the baby dies as a result(not the intended act) then it is permissable. A direct abortion (intended to terminate the baby's life) is never permissable to save the mother's life.
God bless!
I support our bishops in this
I support our bishops in this teaching and am saddened that so many "Catholics" who've written here do not understand some of the basic moral teachings of our Church. If they actually do, then we're in even worse shape, for they choose to ignore it and let pride and selfish desires impede their ability to truly try to understand what Cardinal George is saying! The end does NOT justify the means! I am so sick of angry feminists who happen to be former nuns trying to tear down my Church! Go to the Anglican Church where you can become ordained, but stop ripping apart the Church that Jesus established! While our bishops are not perfect, neither is anyone who's written here. Our Church is not perfect, but Jesus promised it will last.
Thank you Ricky Vines, Anonymous (about pulling...and enough is enough), Joseph J. Pippet and Cynthia333 - you give me hope that there are actually still faithful Catholics out there who know and understand Church teaching and haven't fallen to modernism!
'your' church?
'your' church?
Don't you love it? I keep
Don't you love it? I keep wanting to ask "Where do you keep the title to your church?" Must be in the secret archives in the Vatican.
I like that so much I might
I like that so much I might steal it on occasion! The title to their church indeed! :)
Cynthia333 and
Cynthia333 and Jennifer,
Great comments! It's always amusing to see liberal "Catholics" spew their venom on the Bishops, the Pope and Catholic traditions while trying to remake the Church according to their own ideas. False feminism is rampant among some of the NCR writers especially some of the "nuns" clamoring for women's ordination. It would so seem that women can do no wrong and that they would "save" the Church from those horrible (male) Bishops. Well, more and more evidence is surfacing about some of the nuns having perpetrated sexual abuse which is being covered up and about which the NCR is completely mum. Sr. Keehan, president of CHA, brazenly defies the Bishops and endorses a health care bill which expands abortion and shortchanges seniors (among other things) and she's praised for her actions.
We see nuns excorting women at abortion centers and nuns who have gone "beyond Christ" into worshipping "mother earth". If women's ordination were such a great thing why is the Anglican Church falling apart?
Man and women are both capable of great things but also of despicable things. God gave us equal dignity but also different gifts which we can bring to the Church. Yes, the enemy is alive and well not only without but also within the Church as attested by so much arrogance. God bless Cardinal George for standing firm in protecting the authority of the Bishops against such arrogance.
But Castellina it is a
But Castellina it is a Catholic tradition to remake the Church on the basis of personal ideas. The boys have been doing it for over 1900 years. You can't be such a blind follower that you can't see that.
Lets not lose site of what
Lets not lose site of what the problems are. Please...For starters, how many of the over 60% of the US bishops that have been involved in the sex scandal still preaching? How many of these bishops have allowed sexual abusers leave the ministry without having to register as sex offenders? How many of these bishops have used church money for financial settlements and legal fee's. Amonting, in the billions) How many of these bishops have been held accountable for all the problems they have cause the Catholic church? How many Catholics have stopped supporting their failed bishops? How many Catholics still believe that abusive priests,complicit bishops, billions of dallars use by these failed bishops and allowing thousands of sexual abusers to go Scott Free to enter your community is not reason enough to stand up and say I can not continue to accept this leadership any longer? Where is the Justice Department? Where is the FBI? Do you think the Pope is going to remove these criminals from their high and almighty positions? Do you think the Pope needs 1-2-3 or 4 years to come to the conclusion that is what he has to do for the healing to begin? I DON'T THINK SO. He is not stupid and he is not going to hold anyone responsible, that is so obvious. These are the problems we should be focusing on, not what the bishops are preaching. Why are you still listening to what these failed bishops are preaching anyway. If you have any children, have you checked to see who is living next door to you. It could be one of the thousands of sex abusers that the bishops could care less about, where they live and what they are doing as long as they have a Post Office box number to send them their monthly benefits.Don't let the oil spill,earthquakes and floods take your mind off of what has to be done for the healing to begin. Get involved.
For starters,send the Pope a penney this Sunday. If you don't know where to send it, check with Frank Douglas's web site, "VOICE FROM THE DESERT."
Post new comment