The Independent News Source
NCR on Kindle - NCR classifieds - YouTube - Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
PDF versionBishops urged to restore civility in pro-life efforts
May. 11, 2009
Fr. John P. Langan (CNS)
WASHINGTON
Calling the Obama presidency a new moment in U.S. history, Jesuit Fr. John P. Langan of Georgetown University warned April 27 of a current “three-way impasse” on abortion. He urged U.S. bishops seeking real change to act with caution, pastoral care and “civil respect for those with whom they disagree.”
“The bishops are certainly right to condemn the moral evil of abortion and to warn us against the individualism, selfishness and greed which have had such a devastating effect on American culture and family life as well as on our financial institutions,” he said.
“But if they think they make their witness more credible and more effective by developing a quasi-excommunication of the Democratic Party and by aligning themselves with politicians who think that combining pro-life slogans with American chauvinism and exercising American military power without regard to international criticism constitutes an adequate response to evil in the world, they are sadly mistaken,” he added.
Bishops who try to make abortion the sole or overriding political issue for Catholics are “marginalizing the church’s political influence,” he said.
Langan is Georgetown’s Cardinal Joseph Bernardin professor of Catholic social thought and rector of the university’s Jesuit community. He delivered a carefully nuanced analysis of the Catholic social teaching challenges facing the new Obama administration and the 111th U.S. Congress at a seminar on Capitol Hill, held at the Dirksen Senate Office Building and sponsored by The Catholic University of America’s Life Cycle Institute.
Langan pulled no punches on Catholic politicians who do not embrace the church’s teachings against abortion. “Catholic Democrats in political and civil life will need to show that they are ready to criticize the practice of abortion and that they do not regard it as the unquestionable exercise of an inherent right or as a morally trivial private choice,” he said. “The teaching of the church needs to make some difference in their political behavior and should not be relegated to a purely private realm.”
But at the same time he excoriated those bishops -- and single-issue pro-life advocates they directly or indirectly support -- who put all supporters of legal abortion in a single camp as proponents of the “culture of death,” and who advocate systematic resistance to Obama and his administration on absolutist grounds of opposition to his abortion policies.
NCR: February 3-16, 2012
Subscribe to NCR to get all the news and special features that aren't always available online. In this issue:
- US News: Bishops Host Conference on Immigration
Conference fields advocates' questions on law, policy
- Special Section:Deacons.Serving as parish administrator; roles of wives; and more
- Study: Black Catholics are more engaged
New study by Notre Dame researcher about parish involvement in America
“Even for those who believe that it is seriously wrong to vote for Obama or for other pro-choice candidates, it would be a mistake to think that this point justifies a comprehensive rejection of his programs and policies,” Langan said. “In fact, it seems clear that Catholics, even those with significant church offices and responsibilities, will need to cooperate with the Obama administration on topics such as immigration reform, financial regulation and foreign aid programs.”
“It would also be a serious extension of a pro-life position beyond its original moral premises to hold that pro-life people should work for the failure of Obama’s presidency,” he added. “Failure of a presidency in a time of war and economic crisis is not a prospect that anyone should regard lightly, whether the president’s name is Bush or Obama. National politics in the United States has an inescapably adversarial character, but this is a tendency which thoughtful religious people should look at critically and should try to mitigate rather than reinforce with one-sided demands for righteousness, demands which often turn out to be narrowly focused and rigidly exclusive.”
Langan said that while particulars may be debated, the overall thrust of Obama’s plans for energy, the environment, financial recovery and health care reform is “inclusive, egalitarian, communitarian, solidaristic and internationalist” and thus “broadly compatible with Catholic social values.”
“There seems to be a fairly strong prima facie case for Catholics to support the Obama administration and its agenda as an effort to move American society somewhat closer to the ideals of Catholic social thought and to move our society forward from the pit which it has dug for itself,” he said.
At the same time, he said, Catholic Democrats face a core problem: “Even when they do not favor the legal prohibition of abortion, they believe that abortion is a grave moral evil. They would not want to put the Catholic health care system in jeopardy, much less out of business. ... So they are between the rock of Peter and the hard place of the post-McGovern Democratic Party, which has been less than welcoming over the years.”
He said the proposed path out of that impasse for many Catholic Democrats -- not criminalizing abortion, but implementing a social and economic agenda that aims to reduce the number of abortions -- “does not satisfy the followers and teachers of the straight and narrow path which leads to the absolute prohibition of abortion, a path which actually leads over some very rough territory and which may well be blocked by insurmountable constitutional and political obstacles.”
That proposed path “also fails to satisfy the demand of many pro-choice politicians, activists and experts who favor the full legitimization of abortion as an assertion of reproductive freedom, a choice to be made by women with public funding and support and without public scrutiny,” he said.
Such pro-choice leaders, influential in the party and strengthened by the November election results, “feel no need to appeal to pro-life Democrats or to show respect for Catholic teaching on these matters. Their ideological rigidity has the effect of convincing many of the religious that there can be no compromise with what they call ‘the culture of death,’ ” he said.
“What we are looking at,” he said, “is a three-way impasse”:
- “Pro-life Democrats -- and some pro-life Republicans as well -- are looking for the Obama administration to offer reassurances with regard to conscience clauses [protecting health care workers who conscientiously oppose abortion] and some signs that it is prepared to take seriously the goal of making abortion rare as well as safe and legal. So far there are not many signs that the administration thinks it necessary or worthwhile to make such concessions” and a continued divide on such issues could fracture the religious and secular wings of the current liberal coalition.
- “The bishops, meanwhile, have been discovering that the pace of their political involvement is determined by three groups: 1) a minority of bishops who take positions which capture media attention, such as the denial of Communion to pro-choice politicians; 2) a noisy movement of activists and populists, which includes many sincerely devout people but also far too many members who use scurrilous and vicious language to attack those who deviate from the antiabortion line which they identify with Catholic orthodoxy; and 3) rationalistic moral theorists who hold that all other considerations pale into insignificance in comparison with the intrinsic evil of abortion. In this situation the political influence of the church is likely to be enfeebled and marginalized beyond the dreams of our enemies.”
- “To an increasing extent, the pro-life movement within the church shows a desire to act in ways which break amicable and civil relations with those both inside and outside our church who favor abortion or who support compromise on this issue. ... They lump together both those who deny that abortion is a moral evil and those who believe that even while it is indeed a moral evil, it cannot be effectively forbidden by law in the contemporary United States.”
“The bishops need to think carefully,” Langan commented, “about whether they are showing a heroic resistance to absolute evil or whether they are being used by selfish and dishonest political interests and by zealots who show more passion than judgment when they stubbornly refuse to recognize the limits of what is politically possible in a pluralistic and individualistic society.”
He said that the need in the U.S. church today “is for a group of bishops to teach in a way which shows that they are sensitive to the wounded condition of American Catholicism and to the complexities of the life issues in a very imperfect world.”
“They will need to show civil respect for those with whom they disagree, pastoral concern for Catholics who may question their teaching and caution in scrutinizing those who offer to fight their battles for them,” he said.
Jerry Filteau is NCR Washington correspondent.
I pray daily for real,
I pray daily for real, prophetic church leadership that acknowledges our wounded community without pointing fingers and excommunicating. The leadership I see is of judgement, not of God.
NICELY PUT!
NICELY PUT!
Are we asking government to
Are we asking government to make criminal what we believe to be sinful because we ourselves can't stop committing the sin?
Notre Dame heard an answer to this question 25 years ago from Governor Mario Cuomo
http://pewforum.org/docs/index.php?DocID=14
Religious Belief and Public Morality: A Catholic Governor’s Perspective
Governor Mario Cuomo
Remarks delivered at the University of Notre Dame
September 13, 1984
As a Catholic I accept the church's teaching authority. While in the past some Catholic theologians may appear to have disagreed on the morality of some abortions (it wasn't, I think, until 1869 that excommunication was attached to all abortions without distinction), and while some theologians still do, I accept the bishops' position that abortion is to be avoided.
As Catholics, my wife and I were enjoined never to use abortion to destroy the life we created, and we never have.
But not everyone in our society agrees with me and Matilda.
Certainly, we should not be forced to mold Catholic morality to conform to disagreement by non-Catholics however sincere or severe their disagreement. Our bishops should be teachers not pollsters. They should not change what we Catholics believe in order to ease our consciences or please our friends or protect the Church from criticism.
And it is here, in our attempt to find a political answer to abortion – an answer beyond our private observance of Catholic morality – that we encounter controversy within and without the Church over how and in what degree to press the case that our morality should be everybody else's, and to what effect.
I repeat, there is no Church teaching that mandates the best political course for making our belief everyone's rule, for spreading this part of our Catholicism. There is neither an encyclical nor a catechism that spells out a political strategy for achieving legislative goals.
And so the Catholic trying to make moral and prudent judgments in the political realm must discern which, if any, of the actions one could take would be best.
Are we asking government to make criminal what we believe to be sinful because we ourselves can't stop committing the sin?
The failure here is not Caesar's. This failure is our failure, the failure of the entire people of God.
Nobody has expressed this better than a bishop in my own state, Joseph Sullivan, a man who works with the poor in New York City, is resolutely opposed to abortion and argued, with his fellow bishops, for a change of law. "The major problem the Church has is internal," the Bishop said last month in reference to abortion. "How do we teach? As much as I think we're responsible for advocating public policy issues, our primary responsibility is to teach our own people. We haven't done that. We're asking politicians to do what we haven't done effectively ourselves."
I agree with the Bishop. I think our moral and social mission as Catholics must begin with the wisdom contained in the words "Physician, heal thyself." Unless we Catholics educate ourselves better to the values that define – and can ennoble – our lives, following those teachings better than we do now, unless we set an example that is clear and compelling, then we will never convince this society to change the civil laws to protect what we preach is precious human life.
The point of excommunication
The point of excommunication is to make one realize the true depth of one's error and discord with Christ's Church on Earth at a time before the Final Judgment to allow for reconciliation before the Lord's Judgment rendered is perfect, immutable, and eternal.
cf Matthew 25:31 ff., Rev 20:11-12
Would you be referring to the
Would you be referring to the God of the Bible or to a God of your own making?
The "righteous judgment of God" (2 Thes 1:5) commends "those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of judgment" (John 5:29).
Church leaders need not make any judgments about "Catholic" politicians who support abortion. A five-year-old could made the external observation that such politicians support abortion and see how flatly such support contradicts church teaching. Such an observation of politicians' behavior requires no judgment of their hearts on the bishops' part to know that the politicians are publicly flaunting church teaching - especially when it comes to abortion. Those murdered in abortion are completely innocent by virtue of the fact that they have not been able to commit any crime, yet people still whine about bishop's denying purportedly Catholic politicians' the "right" to receive Communion, while the unborn's right to mere life is ignored.
Who are you to judge the bishops' judgment as not being that of God's? Who are the purportedly Catholic politicians to judge the unborn's unworthiness of the right to life?
I have always understood that
I have always understood that the Official American Church support for Life Issues was consistently respectful and measured. I find it hard to accept the advice of a Jesuit Georgetown University - based professor who refused to object strenuously to the recent action of a Georgetown Administration that covered up the Holy Name of Jesus with plywood during President Obama's speech at Georgetown. I do not blame President Obama, however the action taken by Georgetown was indeed blasphemous. Ironically, President Obama's speech referred to the Sermon on the Mount - which is wise counsel, however is cherished above all for the fact that Jesus-God come in the flesh preached the Sermon on the Mount. I have confidence in the American Episcopate! Happy Eater! For Christ is risen! Alleluia! Alleluia!
I do not have confidence in
I do not have confidence in the American Episcopate!
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,519854,00.html
Former Catholic Archbishop of Milwaukee Admits He's Gay in New Memoir
Monday , May 11, 2009
NEW YORK —
A Roman Catholic archbishop who resigned in 2002 over a sex and financial scandal involving a man has written a memoir that describes how he struggled with being gay.
Archbishop Rembert Weakland, former head of the Milwaukee archdiocese, "is up front about his homosexuality in a church that preferred to ignore gays," Publisher's Weekly wrote in a review Monday.
The book, "A Pilgrim in a Pilgrim Church: Memoirs of a Catholic Archbishop," is set to be released in June and is described by the publisher as a self-examination by Weakland of his "psychological, spiritual and sexual growth."
Weakland stepped down quickly after Paul Marcoux, a former Marquette University theology student, revealed in May 2002 that he was paid $450,000 to settle a sexual assault claim he made against the archbishop more than two decades earlier. The money came from the archdiocese.
In a videotaped deposition released last November, Weakland admitted returning guilty priests to active ministry without alerting parishioners or police.
Advocates for abuse victims said that Weakland's cover up of his own sexual activity was part of a pattern of secrecy that included concealing the criminal behavior of child molesters.
U.S. Catholics have long debated whether the priesthood had become a predominantly gay vocation. Estimates vary from 25 percent to 50 percent, according to a review of research on the issue by the Rev. Donald Cozzens, author of "The Changing Face of the Priesthood."
Cozzens, a former seminary rector, said in an interview that Weakland's acknowledgment of his sexual orientation "cuts into the denial that relatively few priests or bishops are gay."
Bishop Weakland is one of the
Bishop Weakland is one of the heros of the liberals in the Church! NCR's favorite son!
Excellent clarifications and
Excellent clarifications and distinctions! Hope Bishops and the whole spectrum of the laity will read and hear with minds and hearts open to the Spirit . Thanks, Fr. Langan!
Thank you for your fine
Thank you for your fine article. I too hope the outspoken bishops and laity will read and hear with open minds. I have learned that you tend to get more accomplished when you can talk openly about a difference of opinion without the finger pointing and name calling. I have been terribly embarassed with the clamor over President Obama speaking at Notre Dame.
An excellent analysis of the
An excellent analysis of the current problem. Over and over again, however, I keep bringing up two points. One is, what are the conservative bishops trying to accomplish by excoriating Democratic Catholic politicians? If it is to combat abortion, they are failing miserably. All they are doing is making their position laughable to those people Catholic politicians need to help implement some good programs to actually reduce the number of abortions, which should be, one would think, the ultimate objective. It will never be possible to stop all abortions.
Decriminalizing abortions saves the lives of women who, for whatever reason, believe they have no other choice. I believe that this issue of women's lives needs to enter the conversation. It is of vital importance to women. Not, it appears, to some men.
It is of vital importance-
It is of vital importance- and is covered by the twin principles of Double Effect (in theology) and Triage (in medical ethics): When a doctor is faced with two patients who will certainly die without his help, and does not have the time to save both, he is morally required to save the one most likely to survive.
It's also of vanishingly small importance in the abortion debate as it stands in the United States today. Less than 2% of abortions, according to the pro-choice Guttmacher Institute, are to save the life of a woman. The grand majority of abortions are economically driven by fathers who don't want to be fathers (or grandfathers) or can't afford to take responsibility for their choice to have sex and help the woman be a mother.
Therefore, the primary cause of abortion isn't the mother's choice- it's a severe lack and crisis of fatherhood in our society. I would even go so far as to suggest it's a lack of both spiritual and biological fatherhood- a lack of clear leadership from the Church in face of the challenge of feminism to the role of fathers in the family.
Excellent article.. Its about
Excellent article.. Its about time someone had the courage to point out to the bishops the dilemma in which they have put the church...Again to change someones heart the starting point is always respectful dialouge..
Peace and Prayers !
"Key Is Not Trying to Change
"Key Is Not Trying to Change Laws"
http://www.zenit.org/article-24774?l=english
2009-01-14
Capuchin Father Raniero Cantalamessa affirmed this today at the 6th World Meeting of Families, inaugurated today in Mexico City by Cardinal Ennio Antonelli, president of the Pontifical Council for the Family.
Father Cantalamessa said that it is necessary to "avoid the error of spending all our time rebutting contrary theories."
The strategy, he said, is not "to combat the world" but to "dialogue with it, drawing out the good even from criticisms."
Another error that should be avoided, he proposed, is "directing everything toward national laws to defend Christian values."
"The first Christians changed the laws of the state with their customs; we cannot expect today to change the customs with the laws of the state," the preacher reflected.
****************************************************************************
In 1980, Rev. Fr. Cantalamessa was appointed the Preacher to the Papal Household by Pope John Paul II. He has maintained this position under the reign of Pope Benedict XVI. In this capacity, he provides meditation to the Pope and other high-ranking officials each Friday during Lent and Advent,and is "the only person allowed to preach to the Pope." Rev. Fr. Cantalamessa, a frequent speaker, is a member of the Catholic delegation for the Dialogue with the Pentecostal Churches during the past decade. At present, Rev. Fr. Raniero Cantalamessa hosts a weekly program on Radiotelevisione Italiana.
I just hope that the
I just hope that the international media pick up on this article. It should be essential reading and meditation material for each and every one of us. May God soften the hearts of all those whose minds have been closed on this issue whatever their position.
At last. I, too, hope this
At last. I, too, hope this article is disseminated widely and considered thoughtfully.
Thank you, Fr. Lanagan, for
Thank you, Fr. Lanagan, for your clear thinking and depth of understanding. We live in a pluralistic, and highly individualized society. It requires a depth of spirit, patience, and respect for the consciences of those who agree and disagree. The church should focus on education and not villification.
I seriously hope and pray
I seriously hope and pray that no Catholic bishop reads this CINO site. The article is flawed from the very start, ie. the title, much like the infamous question, "Have you stopped beating your wife?", wrongly assumes that the US Catholic Bishops have stopped being civil in their condemnation of abortion. Nothing could be further from the truth!
Instead of Father/Professor/Rector Langan audaciously trying to instruct the US Catholic Bishops, he would use his gifts and time more wisely by instructing his fellow acamedician, Father John Jennings of Notre Dame, on what the real teachers of the Catholic Church, ie. the US Catholic Bishops, actually said about US Catholic institutions honoring those politicians like President Obama, who do not support the Catholic Church's teaching on abortion. But then Father Langan is from Georgetown, which just honored another pro-abortion Democrat, Vice-president Biden.
Father Langan, you missed your real vocation....you would have made a fine politician, Democrat that is.
Regarding President Obama
Regarding President Obama speaking at Notre Dame: Mr. Obama is not Catholic and was not invited to speak on the tenets of the Catholic Church or Christianity.
If he were a Catholic invited to speak about his dissent to the issue of abortion or other life issues, then it would be a travesty. Rather, he is going to speak as President of the United States to a collegiate graduating class. What an honor for those students! Neither the Catholic Church, nor any other religion, can dictate what our Government should or should not do.
And the seed falls on parched
And the seed falls on parched earth . . .
Papal bull "Effraenatam" is
Papal bull "Effraenatam" is brought back to life.
The Roman Catholic Church has throughout its history a "confused" record of "back and forth" decisions about Abortion that few among the "ignorant", "Single Issue" "Pro-Birth" "Pelvic Theologian" Bishops are even aware. They are re-enacting the history of 1588-1591, the period defined by Pope Sixtus V.
St. Augustine (354-430 CE) accepted the Aristotelian Greek Pagan concept of "delayed ensoulment". He wrote that a human soul cannot live in an unformed body. Thus, early in pregnancy, an abortion is not murder because no soul is destroyed (or, more accurately, only a vegetable or animal soul is terminated).
Pope Innocent III (1161-1216): He determined that a monk who had arranged for his lover to have an abortion was not guilty of murder if the fetus was not "animated" at the time. Early in the 13th century, he stated that the soul enters the body of the fetus at the time of "quickening" - when the woman first feels movement of the fetus. Before that time, abortion was a less serious sin, because it terminated only potential human person, not an actual human person.
Pope Sixtus V (1588) issued a Papal bull "Effraenatam" which threatened those who carried out abortions at any stage of gestation with excommunication and the death penalty.
Pope Gregory XIV (1591) revoked the previous Papal bull and reinstated the "quickening" test, which he determined happened 116 days into pregnancy (16½ weeks).
Pope Pius IX (1869) dropped the distinction between the "fetus animatus" and "fetus inanimatus." The soul was believed to have entered the pre-embryo at conception.
Leo XIII (1878-1903):He Issued a decree in 1884 that prohibited craniotomies. This is an unusual form of abortion used under crisis situations late in pregnancy. It is occasionally needed to save the life of the pregnant woman. He issued a second degree in 1886 that prohibited all procedures that directly killed the fetus, even if done to save the woman's life.
Canon law was revised in 1917 and 1983 to refer simply to "the fetus." The church penalty for abortions at any stage of pregnancy was, and remains, excommunication.
This is an interesting
This is an interesting history. Can "Confucius" refer us to his or her source materials?
Thank you good Father
Thank you good Father Anonymous. We must assume that you are a Republican. The Bishop's leadership parallels the failure of George W. Bush. It is in fact bankrupt! The People of God must struggle against these old men or they, themselves become complacent in so many Bishop's lack of integrity. and even simple decency.
These comments are a mystery
These comments are a mystery to me and support Fr. Langan's stance. Civilty is called for in all our dealings. I think Father Langan was very clear that we cannot tolerate the act of abortion but need to look at the whole picture rather than just one issue. I am tired of our Church's one issue stance. Abortion is wrong but so are a lot of other things that we need to address!
Before you start
Before you start pontificating on what Fr. Langan should be saying to Fr. Jennings, put your money where your mouth is.
Why don't YOU and all your fellow zealots start following the lead by the US Catholic Bishops and the Vatican on ALL fronts? Such as for example when Pope John Paul II deemed Bush's war "neither morally or legally justified" - I don't recall any applause from your corner at the time.
Further, if Fr.Jennings' own bishop has established a course of action to be taken, why the venomous attempts to change it? Why the rabid calls for harsher punishment and more radical action? Since when did the likes of you get to dictate how the clergy handled its own?
Or isn't it the case that your alleged support of the "real teachers" are only restricted to those policies that validate your own narrow-minded and selfish agenda. Seek first to cleanse yourself of the self-righteous garbage you've been swallowing before you can even remotely qualify to preach to others. The only CINO here is you, yourself.. hypocrite!
Here's what I wrote in
Here's what I wrote in another forum in response to this article:
After the recent outing on Catholic Culture.org of the Knights of Columbus's methods with respect to this- we Knights don't remove a brother from our ranks without excommunication from a Bishop, despite dissent on church teaching- I think pro-life Bishops would do well to slightly modify their message and methods as well:
1. Any pro-choice Cafeteria Catholic politician's statements on abortion or euthanasia should be immediately countered with press releases from the Bishop's office and private communications to that politician.
2. Any pro-war Cafeteria Catholic politician's statements on use of arms in foreign relations should be immediately countered with press releases from the Bishop's office and private communications to that politician.
3. Any pro-death-penalty Cafeteria Catholic politician's statements on the treatment of prisoners should be immediately countered with press releases from the Bishop's office and private communications to that politician.
4. Catholic Charities needs to work directly with the Knights of Columbus to fund homes for unwed mothers, pregnancy resource centers, and women's clinics equal to or in excess of services that Planned Parenthood provides- let's go head to head with Planned Parenthood in capitalistic competition and put them out of business.
5. IF a politician from categories 1-3 does NOT respond to Catholic teaching after several attempts at policies 1-3, then the Bishop should step up to actively endorsing candidates on the ballot even though this endangers the church's non-profit status. Perhaps we could return to the model of the Bishop being an ambassador of the Pope to counter.
6. Finally, after all of that, if we still can't embarrass pro-death Catholics enough to keep them out of office, we should use excommunication.
I applaud John Langan's
I applaud John Langan's sensible remarks. Let's hope someone is listening. My own view of this subject is that the Bishops' declaration of war against the Obama Administration (to quote one of them) and relentless focus on reversing Roe v Wade is just rhetorical grandstanding (which is a polite way of saying "cheap talk"). Roe is not the issue. Were it reversed, a majority of states would immediately authorize abortion, many without any restrictions. When polls consistently show that a significant majority of Catholics believe that abortion should be available to pregnant women under all or most circumstances,it's time to recognize a pastoral failure of catastrophic proportions and begin, belatedly, to address it.
It will be interesting to see
It will be interesting to see if they listen to him ignore him oror fire him
What the bishops need to
What the bishops need to realize is that the cause of recriminalizing abortion is lost. It is never going to happen for a number of reasons, one of the prime reasons being that criminalizing abortion would, ipso facto, criminalize embyonic stem cell research which is supported by most Americans, including some long-time pro-life advocates such as Sen. Orin Hatch and Nancy Reagan. And the great pro-life hope of overturning Roe vs. Wade would not outlaw a single abortion, but simply turn the matter over to the states. At this point in time, few, if any states, are likely to completely outlaw abortion. And let's not forget that the Church deems even exceptions for life of the mother or rape and incest as "intrinsically evil". Ought policians who vote for such exceptions, even (heaven forbid!) Republican politicians, be excommunicated?
I am sick and tired of the
I am sick and tired of the likes of Bishop Burke and others who have turned the Catholic church into the Republican Party at Prayer. This article puts everything in perspective.
Burke et al are the Catholic
Burke et al are the Catholic versions of Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, James Dodson and the like. Burke and his cohorts will end the same place as these guys - irrelevant, except for a small following single and simply minded extremists.
Burke, Chaput et al. are
Burke, Chaput et al. are trying to turn the Catholic church into a wholly owned subsidiary of the Republican party.
And their gutteral arch-conservative calls aren't going unheeded - legions of rabid right-wing zealots are converting to Catholicism, infiltrating our Church with their grotesque, twisted versions of Christianity.
This disease needs to be purged from the inside.
Would we even be having this
Would we even be having this debate if the issue were, say, apartheid? Or keeping black folks in slavery? Did anyone argue in the pages of NCR that politicians who supported a MAD (Mutually Assured Distruction) strategy should be somehow "reached out to" or given an honorary degree? Strange, I didn't see any calls for nuanced positions from folks on the left when it came to those issues, or issues like nuclear disarmament.
Catholic Democrats (and Republicans) who vote against the rights of an oppressed minority (unwanted children) are excoriated not because they are Democrats but because their position, that the weak and helpless should be at the mercy of those who would kill them, is incompatible with the Gospel. It is as incompatible with the Gospel as the notion that the slaughter of innocent (protesting, even) non-combatants is OK, as long as one has a "good enough" reason to kill them; or that slavery is OK because the economic fabric of a society depends on it. Sorry to be so blunt, folks, but that's the way it is.
I believe our country at one
I believe our country at one time did have this conversation about slavery - and history tells us that, in general, the catholic church in the South sat on its hands - or worse - offered justifications for the Peculiar Institution.
Actually, before the Civil
Actually, before the Civil Rights movement, the Church showed little or now courage in standing against Jim Crow - even in Mass.
I agree with Meg. Abortion is
I agree with Meg. Abortion is not a political issue but a moral one. It is however being acted out in the poliical stage. This is where all the moral issues are disseminated. To hear the logic of the pro-aborts gives insight to just how far from the natural law of God we as a nation have drifted. We can not, as a nation condon or encourage mothers to destroy their children.
I cannot applaud this fine
I cannot applaud this fine piece by Fr. Langan loudly or long enough!
Finally - a clear moral statement combined with the voice of reason.
Thank you so much, Fr. Langan.
Amen!!
Amen!!
This is why the Church needs
This is why the Church needs the Jesuits and why the Jesuit colleges and universities must remain free of interference from the local Bishops and Cardinals. They think before they speak - unlike many moronic Bishops and Cardinals.
It has been argued (with
It has been argued (with compelling arguments on both sides) that both the Doctrine of Double Effect and the Criteria for a Just War might be applied to the abortion question. Let a reasonable and respectful debate begin!
Great article. I'd say this
Great article. I'd say this is right on the target. I do not know why people think it is okay to try to bring down a presidency that was won quite fairly. Are they trying to undermine the whole U.S. government - because that is what it amounts to just as saying nasty things to people who voted for President Obama yet are against abortion undermines their moral judgement as intelligent Catholics. Let's get the nastiness out and real conversation in.
Remember, "render unto ceasar
Remember, "render unto ceasar that which is ceasar's" should not be forgotten b the church leaders of all faiths. The tne commandments are not SUGGESTIONS and traditions are the cement that holds the mosaic of societies and faith groups together.
Fr. Langan's words of wisdom
Fr. Langan's words of wisdom and truth are a very welcome voice for a Church so out of touch with its' people. I applaud him!
As a result of the unholy
As a result of the unholy alliance of the Catholic Church and the Republican Party, certain bishops and priests have been bitten by the showbiz bug. They are a distinct minority but--like the GOP noise machine--they are LOUD and they adore being quoted in the papers and toasted on the rightwing blogs. Everyone knows that in showbiz you stay on top of your game by kicking it up a notch. Civility will get you nowhere. Warlike partisanship will land you a slot on EWTN with Raymond Arroyo and his adoring audience. Regardless of the Pope's oblique call for temperance (perhaps Obama isn't the anit-Christ after all) I doubt the drama and corruption in the American church will end anytime soon. The limelight is powerfully addictive and Culture Wars has become a way of life for many, some even make quite a nice living from it.
Excellent rehash of the usual
Excellent rehash of the usual talking points of those who would USE the Catholic faith to drive a political agenda. Those outspoken bishops condemned by the good Father Langan are simply restating the Churches moral teaching. They are not politicizing the issue as is Father Langan. "Sensible remarks... essential read... magnum opus!" While you analyze the issue in a "more nuanced" and sophisticated fashion you cover over the murder of innocent human beings. May God have mercy on us all.
This article saddens me
This article saddens me deeply, considering that it comes from a lack of nuance while accusing its opponents of that very thing. Civility doesn't entail accepting the propositions of one's opponents. Any type of objection on the part of those not willing to compromise fundamental Catholic beliefs in favor of a "status quo" capitulation always meets with this "call to nuance and understanding." Human respect is more important than respect for divine law, clearly. Someone above mentioned that the majority of Catholics believe that abortion should be available to women. I would like to see those polls. However, even if that were true, does that make them right? Was Christ the majority when he was condemned to death? It seems that poll data has become a way for those who depend on it to appease their consciences. Unfortunately, we all need to realize that a majority of human opinion does not make a right.
First, it is also unfortunate that the very staunch opposition to the Obama administration on his anti-life policies should be termed political opposition. Issues such as health care reform, raising taxes, bailouts, Social Security, and the like are political issues. Catholic Social Thought (CST) allows for many different applications of principles in these areas and there is plenty of room for legitimate debate. We are not debating any of those right now. We are debating the most fundamental right of all.
Second, the bishops who have written to Fr. Jenkins to condemn his actions are not doing so because they think that reasonable and public debate about this issue is not possible or undesirable. If President Obama were invited to a public debate about life issues at Notre Dame, there would not be a word of protest. The issue is giving him an honor. Fr. Jenkins' argument about the NCCB statutes concerning only Catholic politicians is completely disingenuous. If Obama were pro-life and had the same social program, while still being a Democrat, the whole of the U.S. bishops would undoubtedly support his efforts across the board. The dearth of pro-life Democrats is precisely why the seems to be political, when in reality it is not. The fundamental primacy of the right to life has political consequences, which does not mean that it is a fundamentally political issue. Those who try to make it so are either intellectually dishonest or have truly been deceived.
You can shout all you want
You can shout all you want about the fundamental right to life of the unborn, but you will not convince anyone who sees this right as one which gives precedent over a mother's right to life. You are asking rational people to believe that the unborn have a greater right to life than women. Greater, not equal.
If it were men who's lives were threatened by pregnancy I guarantee self defense would apply in the case of abortion.
This article saddens me
This article saddens me deeply, considering that it comes from a lack of nuance while accusing its opponents of that very thing. Civility doesn't entail accepting the propositions of one's opponents. Any type of objection on the part of those not willing to compromise fundamental Catholic beliefs in favor of a "status quo" capitulation always meets with this "call to nuance and understanding." Human respect is more important than respect for divine law, clearly. Someone above mentioned that the majority of Catholics believe that abortion should be available to women. I would like to see those polls. However, even if that were true, does that make them right? Was Christ the majority when he was condemned to death? It seems that poll data has become a way for those who depend on it to appease their consciences. Unfortunately, we all need to realize that a majority of human opinion does not make a right.
First, it is also unfortunate that the very staunch opposition to the Obama administration on his anti-life policies should be termed political opposition. Issues such as health care reform, raising taxes, bailouts, Social Security, and the like are political issues. Catholic Social Thought (CST) allows for many different applications of principles in these areas and there is plenty of room for legitimate debate. We are not debating any of those right now. We are debating the most fundamental right of all.
Second, the bishops who have written to Fr. Jenkins to condemn his actions are not doing so because they think that reasonable and public debate about this issue is not possible or undesirable. If President Obama were invited to a public debate about life issues at Notre Dame, there would not be a word of protest. The issue is giving him an honor. Fr. Jenkins' argument about the NCCB statutes concerning only Catholic politicians is completely disingenuous. If Obama were pro-life and had the same social program, while still being a Democrat, the whole of the U.S. bishops would undoubtedly support his efforts across the board. The dearth of pro-life Democrats is precisely why the seems to be political, when in reality it is not. The fundamental primacy of the right to life has political consequences, which does not mean that it is a fundamentally political issue. Those who try to make it so are either intellectually dishonest or have truly been deceived.
What is Catholic social
What is Catholic social teaching? I have been a Catholic since I was born in 1949. I went to Catholic schools for 12 years and graduated high school in 1966, and college in 1970. Never once, not once, not ever were we preached to about the evils of abortion and intrinsic evil, and grave sins. Never. Meanwhile during that time, hundreds and thousands of abortions were being performed annually--either back alley or self induced; and many women were slaughtered, and not a word from the Catholic clergy. All of a sudden in 1973, anti-abortion became THE fundamental Catholic belief.
Have any of you asked yourselves, why would women select abortion? I have. I remember a time when a couple who "had to get married," were banished to rectory for a simple wedding, and not a nuptial Mass. I remember, when unwed women and their children were pariahs in polite society, and it was encouraged by the clergy and religious. I remember a time when women, after having given birth, could not return to Mass unless there was some sort of purifying ceremony--many women were not able to attend the baptisms of their children. The Catholic church shares much of the blame for demonizing women for centuries over sexual issues. I think if I had found myself in a predicament back then, I would have seriously considered abortion. Now that this is the premiere issue of our religion, never once have I heard the clergy preach to men that they choose fatherhood, not once. It is as though pregnancy occurred in a vacuum, The organization that they recommend to women is named "A Woman's Concern." Seriously. A woman's concern. Not man's concern, or even humanity's concern.
Why does the church condone the rape of women (and of little boys)? That is exactly what they do when they declare that the morning after pill is intrinsically evil and a grave sin for rape victims. What kind of a message does the church send to women when they deny us the right to select the fathers of our children? By denying us that right, they have conferred sub-human status upon us, while they praise the inherent dignity of women. That they cannot understand that so many of us see the hypocrisy of their positions. They praise motherhood and the maternal instinct while excommunicating a mother who would protect her 9-year old daughter's life and uterus from splitting by carrying to term a monster's spawn.
Is that what Catholic social teaching is about-- controlling women's sexual behavior? What kind of a religion is that?
Thank you so much Anonymous.
Thank you so much Anonymous. Not a man's concern indeed. The male hierarchy seems concerned in the abstract. Where are the references to the men who make these women pregnant? Your point are VERY well-taken and I applaud your courage in making them. Thank God for NCR, may their words spread far & wide.
Thanks to Fr. Langan for
Thanks to Fr. Langan for reminding us, as John F. Kennedy put it, that "Civility is not a sign of weakness."
Rev. Isaac McDaniel
We have laws against killing
We have laws against killing and people still murder! Laws against stealing and people still steal!
I am so totally against abortion, however, people (women) have free will and will still choose to abort regardless of a law.
We need to do more to support women after they have determined to have their baby. There isn't enough support after the birth! There is where the change is needed! Women who are single and/or in financial family straits, fear having a child they can't support...where are the pro-lifers when these women need financial, moral, emotional and spiritual support?
Are there enough institutions and finances to help these women???
finally, a voice of
finally, a voice of reason!!!!!!!!!a thousand thanks!!!!!!!!!!!
Squeaking wheel gets the oil
Squeaking wheel gets the oil - gets noticed by Vatican too!!
Fr. John P. Langan has mentioned only TWO possible reasons for the MISGUIDED actions of a minority of bishops:
1. taking positions which capture media attention, such as the denial of Communion to pro-choice politicians
2. being used by selfish and dishonest political interests and by zealots who show more passion than judgment
The underlying reason to get whatever media attention possible is only to help these "Power-hungry" and "Career-Oriented" bishops (especially if they had studied at Rome and have the "connections") to CLIMB the COROPRATE EPISCOPAL LADDER as fast as possible.
Bishop---->Archbishop----->Cardinal----->Pope (First American POPE!!!)
All power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely...
"[W]hat are the conservative
"[W]hat are the conservative bishops trying to accomplish by excoriating Democratic Catholic politicians? If it is to combat abortion, they are failing miserably. All they are doing is making their position laughable to those people Catholic politicians need..."
St Paul had a similar experience. He called it being "a fool for Christ." Or so I remember from my school days.
To quote the good Father, "[t]he teaching of the church needs to make some difference in their political behavior and should not be relegated to a purely private realm.” Should they exercise their free will and choose not to, for the sake of political opportunity, it may or may not matter how a bishop or priest tries to package it; they will have to make a sacrifice, one they are unwilling to make.
In the meantime, no, bishops won't admonish politicians on issues of, say, health care reform, in the same way that they do with abortion. Their public positions suggest that there is no need.
I find this article a strong
I find this article a strong breath of fresh air in the face of the judgmental remarks of so many who are incapable of dialogue. Thank you Fr. Langan. Please continue to analyze these issues and help to clear the air. George
Thanks to Father Langan for a
Thanks to Father Langan for a clearly thought out and logically argued position.
But let's look at our bishops. Why do they persist? Why don't they work with Obama on issues which would result in fewer abortions; issues of healthcare, jobs. Where are the thoughtful bishops? Could it be the bishops see themselves being left behind not only by most Americans but by most Catholics on all sorts of issues--war, environment, healthcare. Is there just one American bishop whose name come automatically to mind on these issues? And so maybe the majority of bishops have just given up and the only thing left for them is to fulminate about abortion. But of course, not much mentioned now, is that other issue that overhangs every American bishop, the issue of sexual abuse. Could bishops be using abortion to cover up the real immorality that they and only they can atone for? Abortion is convenient for bishops; it changes the subject.
Maybe I'm overly optimistic,
Maybe I'm overly optimistic, but I believe there are still a few thoughtful bishops in the USCCB. Unfortunately, they've been bullied into silence by the pit bulls whose ALL-ABORTION-ALL-THE-TIME tantrums have allowed them to control the church and turn it into an arm of the Republican party. We've seen Randall Terry and his mentor Abp Burke plotting the ouster of 2 DC area bishops, George Wiegel publicly attacking Cardinal McCarrick, and the lynch mob that's been stalking Fr. Jenkins the past few weeks. I can only imagine how much cloak and dagger goes on behind the scenes that is never made public. The pit bulls have served notice--Don't Cross Us!!! Up to now, only the Jesuits have had the guts to call them out.
This is a balanced assessment
This is a balanced assessment of the problem we currently face.
I'd love to see a viable alternative in the arena of political parties for conscientious, thinking Catholics to align themselves. Right now, there are huge flaws in each party. Isn't it time for a new one that could reflect the "seamless garment of life"?
I don't think many, if any,
I don't think many, if any, are likely to open to being influenced by those who belittle, condemn, vilify or marginalize them. Influencing others is more likely to occur in the context of respectful dialogue that ensures opposing parties truly understand and can convince each other they truly understand the oppositions position. In those circumstances both parties are likely to learn from each other and be open to creating solutions that both can support. I think Father Langan's proposes exactly that sort of process. Shaming and name calling only lead to resistance to being influenced by the shamer/name caller. Shaming and name calling never led me to adopt the position of the shamer/name caller. We are called by Christ to love one another, not just judge and condemn.
Well said, Fr. Langan.
Well said, Fr. Langan. Better said than almost anyone else I've read. We need to hear more similarly respected voices of reason until the American bishops themselves start to think, reflect and exercise their teaching office to work toward a collegial statement from the conference. Even the ultra right respect the teaching authority of the bishops. Despite Jesus words in another context -- "even if someone were to rise from the dead ..." -- perhaps then we could come together on this and other challenges facing the church in the 21st century.
"Even when they do not favor
"Even when they do not favor the legal prohibition of abortion, they believe that abortion is a grave moral evil."
If it is true that they believe that abortion is a grave moral evil, then they would be in favor of protecting ALL Human Life from the beginning, which obviously would include being in favor of the legal prohibition of abortion.
Where do I start? Father
Where do I start? Father Langen has written an impressive article. Let me state that everyone is PRO-LIFE. The difference is that we are divided between the pro-abortion and anti-abortion groups. No mother wants to abort her baby but desperation does consume many mothers-to-be who lack proper medical care and a livelihood to take care of the baby. We must seek social and economic answers for the abortion problem. Here are some of my thoughts - universal health coverage, social services and social programs, more day care centers, and more funding for adoption agencies so the caseload can be manageable.
I must admit, I find this
I must admit, I find this difficult to swallow!
I am always amazed that it is: the Catholic Church, the Bishops, the activist, the pro-lifers that must compromise on the issues of the church.
I applaud Father for his points, but, I am afraid, we would have strong disagreements.
We cannot manipulate Church teachings to the whims and fancies of people. We seemingly think that polls should dictate where the church goes; what the Bishops should do.
I respect the article, but again, find some of it difficult to swallow!
I will surely pray and reflect on it.
I believe his argument is
I believe his argument is whether it is acceptable for the Church to be "morally pure" on this issue and therefore impotent - or if a more moderate stance might lead to political engagement and actually fewer abortions. Is it about the issue or is it about the babies? I'm not sure some in the church can answer that question.
Dear Fr. Joseph, SJ It is not
Dear Fr. Joseph, SJ
It is not the Bishops who have children---but the laity---women. The "Sensus Fidelum" have a right to have their voices heard in this issue and it is not being listened to by the hierarchy. Instead, the Arch/bishops act as though
the Church belongs to them---and that the laity are just interlopers.
The "Ad hominem" attacks by some of the Arch/bishops on the President and other civic leaders must stop. They are nothing but political barbs disguised as high moral ground.
As far as theologians are concerned, during Vatican Council II, many 'periti' (translators and theologians) assisted the prelates in their delibrations, in giving advice and in doing research. One such 'periti' assisting the great Cardinal Frings of Cologne---became our current Pope---Benedict XVI. Theologians perform great service to the Church----and educate many bishops. As you know, in America, many of our hierarcy have degrees in canon law---not in theology!
Fr. Joseph, without people, what is the need of a Church? Do the Bishops think that they can continue to lead people like they did in centuries past---expecting the people to be like mindless sheep? If the Bishops cannot find a way to dialogue, to reach today's people----there will be precious few of "tomorrow's" people for them to reach.
"I am always amazed that it
"I am always amazed that it is: the Catholic Church, the Bishops, the activist, the pro-lifers that must compromise on the issues of the church." Fr.Joseph,SJ writes. Your tolerance is respected but,I think, your premise has it backward.
Thanks to Fr. Langan for his
Thanks to Fr. Langan for his thorough clarification. For me and many others it "rings true". In Catholic terminology it is the "sensus fidelium" if a world-wide poll were taken of Catholics who want to be faithful to the teachings of the Church...What an opportunity for President Obama to make a clear statement about his position on this issue when he talks at Notre Dame. I hope it embraces the essence of Fr. Langan's offering which I sense the majority of bishops agree with, but are fearful of so stating. I know it is a trite statement, but we need to "agree to disagree agreeably" on this issue as well as we do on others.
This article gives clear
This article gives clear voice to the anguish felt by many Catholic Democrats, who find we can not "just leave" the Church that we love, and indeed, agree with it's teachings on the morally evil character of abortion, but who do not think that outlawing abortion will do anything to stop it. All to often, we face vitriol from our party for not being "pro-choice," and face accusations of heresy from certain people in our church. Thank you, Fr. Langan, for your excellent analysis of this issue.
WHAT? “civil respect for
WHAT? “civil respect for those with whom they disagree.”
Wow ... Civil Respect? There was Civil Respect for Hitler in Pre-WWII Europe when he started disenfranchising the Jewish Population. How far should we go with “civil respect for those with whom they disagree.” when the slaughter of innocent lives is happening in front of our eyes? God Help the diplomat who doesn't wants to be civil in the face of true evil!
Post new comment