The Independent News Source
NCR on Kindle - NCR classifieds - YouTube - Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Printer-friendly version
PDF versionVoices that balance the political/religious conversation
by Tom Roberts on Nov. 17, 2011
Don't wish to be redundant, but for those who haven't caught the latest on colleague Michael Sean Winters' blog, I'd like to call attention to the recent appearance by John Gehring, senior writer and Catholic outreach coordinator for Faith in Public Life, on MSNBC.
He was interviewed about the U.S. bishops' initiative on religious freedom. The point is, agree or not -- and in this case I more agree with Gehring than not -- he has become one of the public voices in the Catholic world that has come to the fore in the aftermath of the 2004 election when the far right seemed to own the only religious interpretation of events.
Another of those groups is Catholic Democrats, who issued a detailed plea that was posted elsewhere on these pages to the U.S. bishops to address poverty.
Such groups provide a healthy counterweight at times -- at others a healthy agreement -- to the declarations of both religious and civil authorities. They keep on the public agenda items that each of those worlds, civil and religious, at times would rather have out of the limelight.
On the matter of religious liberty, the bishops may see and understand a great deal more than this writer's admittedly limited vision allows. But the point made editorially in NCR at other points seems apt, at least as a question. How can the bishops claim a threat to religious liberty, particularly Catholic beliefs, in the culture when:
- a majority of the justices on the Supreme Court are Catholic;
- Catholics make up the largest single religious denomination in Congress;
- we have a Catholic vice president;
- the governors and mayors of some of the most important states and cities are Catholic;
- Catholics arguably inhabit more positions of power in influential institutions, from the military to Wall Street, than ever before?
I can understand that the bishops have been unsuccessful in convincing people -- Catholics and otherwise -- of certain of their points of view, especially on matters of sex, but is that primarily the result of anti-religious forces or is there something else entirely in the mix?
Yes Tom, there is. The
Yes Tom, there is. The problem is Religious Freedom is so easily co opted and turned into a slogan with a twist. When you connect this simple term with
the high powerd bishops agenda for control over even the most private aspects
of catholic lives its easier to interpret. They simply want to be able to
insure that people they hire do not have the personal freedom to use their
consciences. Despite the fact that V2 clearly rejected the idea of having to have a 'well formed', as in you do what we say because we 'form' you conscience for you. Its simply part of the retreat to Trent. Fortunately not
many catholics today will listen to that nonsense. Most of us simply do not
believe or accept the ideas in Humanae Vitae. We are also deeply conscious of the fact that 7 billion will easily double in the next generation. Of course we are also inviting nature to take care of the problem through no
kind measures such as war and pestilence. The kind of religiosity that is
based on the acceptance of certitudes is truly heretical. If they have
certitude then there is simply no need for faith. When last I checked, I
am pretty sure what we as catholics share is a common Faith.
In nomine domini.
TomC
ZERO RCC CREDIBILITY ?
ZERO RCC CREDIBILITY ? ...... Thanks, Tom, for reminding us of the great efforts of CatholicDemocrats and John Gehring, as representatives of millions of "silent US Catholics", who advocate for and support the many Catholic programs that are helping the growing number of less fortunate Americans.
As I indicated in my comment to the MSW column you link to above, Rome and the US bishops appear to be desparate to help elect a "lower taxes on the Catholic 1%" Republican US president next November. The Catholic 99% must, it appears, take a back seat now as far as the US bishops are concerned.
The farcical "religious liberty" charade of bishops Dolan, Lori, Chaput, et al. appears to be the US bishops' PR theme for this quadrennial election year morality play. Meanwhile, KC's Finn "appoints" a state prosecutor a "adjutant bishop" in the KC diocese. Religious liberty gets traded off for Finn's personal liberty, it appears. Amazing!
How sad that the US bishops have incurred this unnecessary "opportunity cost" by their flawed strategy. Millions of Catholics would blessedly support an honest effort by the US bishops to help the less fortunate and to clean up the bishops' disgraceful policy of relentlessly and wastefully protecting bishops who enable pedophile priests to rape again.
It appears that Federal prosecutors may be the only people the US bishops and their Roman superiors will finally listen to.
No easy answers to these
No easy answers to these questions Tom. I see some pretty curious comments from all perspectives on these blogs. I'm a traditional Catholic so my views are way more to the "right" than most of the writers on these NCR blogs.
A few thoughts from my perspective:
Bishops opened the discussion on religious liberty to serve goverment notice that the US Church is claiming the moral highground on major social issues.
Contrast that with the Church's the ever-expanding sex scandals, cover-ups, redistribution of wealth (a pillar of Marxist ideology), and the recent Vatican claim we need a one-world government to fix the economic disasters.
It causes any self-respecting religious person to wonder what the heck is going on!
The side of the RC Church hierarchy and laity that adamantly pushed for government-run universal healthcare and in the process got abortion-on-demand and 1/3 take-over of the healthcare system will have the blood of millions upon millions of innocent lives (unborn and old) on their hands in the coming years. That is my earnest belief.
Additionally, we have enablers; Biden, Pelosi, the Kennedy's, Kerry, who wear the badge of Catholicism on their lapel and quite frankly makes me sick to think they are still in the Church's good graces.
Harsh words but soken from my core convictions and beliefs.
Good heavens. John Gehring
Good heavens. John Gehring is sane and thoughtful. How refreshing and how unusual for such an obviously religious man.
There may be anti-Catholic bias out there in the world and in the U.S., but the awarding of contracts by HHS and writing of regulations by HHS are not examples of it. Neither is the Obama administration's abandonment of defending the indefensible "Defense of Marriage Act" nor of the State of Illinios decision to award service contracts to agencies that will not discriminate against a recognized group, gays and gay couples.
These are examples of the conflict between freedoms of a constitutional republic and religious dogma. Religious freedom exists as it always did to allow faiths to preach, teach, exhort others in the ways of whatever faith each individual holds. However, religious freedom does not mean that a religious person or institution can attempt to manipulate and coerce others to follow any particular tenets of a faith. And that is what the bishops are doing in denying contraceptive and abortions information to victims of human trafficking. They are also manipulating and coercing employees of Catholic organizations when denying them health insurance coverage for contraceptives and sterilization. The Church is seeking government sanction to discriminate against a recognized minority when they want contracts to discriminate against gays.
The Catholic Church is actually a danger to religious liberty and rights of conscience rather than a defender of either in its attempt to use government money and religious exemptions to force people to act according to tenets of the faith, rather than believe and accept them.
It seems true in many ways
It seems true in many ways that "1984" seems to be getting closer and closer, even if a few decades late. Danger does exist, and the price of freedom is eternal vigilance (according to Ben Franklin, I seem to recall). At the same time, one would be more convinced of the bishops' intentions if they were at least as solicitous for the religious liberty of others as they seem to be for that of Catholics. Their record on that score is not exactly spotless, especially of late. And what about religious liberty and due process WITHIN the Church? Very bad record there.
Post new comment