[sinkspur]

Thanks for the correction.

Did his refusal not backfire?

[narses]

"Did his refusal not backfire?"

Nope, not really. But more important, did the Sacramento Bishop create a backlash favoring Grey Davis? Your claim is that denial will create a backlash, the Bishop took a very public and principled stand (thank God for faithful Bishops) and the public accepted that. It was over ABORTION Deacon, in California, a battleground state. Your 'analysis', staked on a decades old legislative race, pales when compared to a statewide, recent race.

This is a critical debate and I appreciate very much your clearly mainstream view. The FACTS though are against you.

[B Knotts]

Did his refusal not backfire?

Whose refusal? Certainly not Bishop Wiegand, which was more a rebuke than a refusal. Even Bishop Maher's refusal may not have actually helped the winning candidate much.

But, you see, I'm not looking at this from a political perspective.

What I am concerned about is this ongoing refusal of the U.S. bishops to simply teach the Catholic faith. When they have to have a committee to decide if one can be pro-abortion and still be admitted to Holy Communion, it sends a confusing message to those who would be tempted to think that one can be Catholic and pro-abortion.

It may cause some who may lean in that direction to adhere to groups like CFFC, CTA or FutureChurch, because they aren't hearing a clear and unequivocal message that such groups are outside the Church.

I only ask the bishops to have the same ability to enforce discipline as they show with traditional Catholics who dare prefer the ancient Order of Mass. They never seem to have a problem with "pastoral concerns" in that area.