Putz Kennedy. This apple didn't fall far from the tree.
Posted on 04/24/2005 9:52:06 AM PDT by madprof98
Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger's emergence as Pope Benedict XVI serves as a sharp reminder that the church has a set of strong views that Catholic politicians often find themselves at odds with.
Certainly this has been the case with the three Catholics -- all Democrats -- in Rhode Island's congressional delegation: Sen. Jack Reed, Rep. Patrick Kennedy and Rep. Jim Langevin.
For example, Reed supports abortion rights. Kennedy generally does, too, although he makes an exception for certain late-term abortions. Langevin generally opposes abortion rights, so it's easy to think of him as closely attuned to church views. But he parts company with the church in his high-visibility role crusading for stem-cell research.
If Pope Benedict's performance upholds his reputation as a fierce defender of traditional, conservative church stands, it could add to the tensions in the lives of Catholic politicians. Before he became pope, Cardinal Ratzinger condemned abortion and told U.S. bishops it was appropriate to deny communion to politicians who favor abortion rights. He denounced stem-cell research, same-sex marriage, adoptions by gay parents and birth control. Indeed, The New York Times reports that in 1988 he wrote to U.S. bishops, "criticizing their acceptance of condoms to stop the spread of AIDS, saying the American view supported 'the classical principle of tolerance of the lesser evil.' "
Reed told me on Wednesday, "You have to allow him to establish his papacy and judge him not based on premonitions but based on what he says and what he does."
Kennedy and Langevin expressed deep concerns about where the church may be heading. But the two congressmen, scheduled to attend today's inaugural service at the Vatican, also theorized that the pope may now moderate his views.
Kennedy declared, "Benedict the 16th is not Cardinal Ratzinger and we'll have to wait and see who he becomes." As for whether he has any reason to believe the pope will liberalize the church's positions, Kennedy said, "It's a hope. It's springtime."
Langevin said it is as hard to predict how a pope will govern as it is to predict how a new Supreme Court justice will vote. Does he really think the new pontiff will be transformed in office? "I would not be surprised," he said.
His hope is that the pope will "make Catholics and all people feel welcome and cared for by the church."
All three politicians noted that, in his first papal Mass, the pontiff spoke in conciliatory tones about reaching out to other religions.
Reed seemed the least worried, or perhaps the most detached, about the church's having a conservative coloration. When I asked how he'd feel if he were denied communion because of his votes for abortion rights, he said, "I recognize the right of religious communities to govern themselves."
I wondered how Reed felt about the ban, supported by Cardinal Ratzinger, on women priests. The senator said, "I would be reluctant to give advice to any religious organization."
Kennedy long has said women should be allowed to be priests, and Langevin says that would be fine with him as well.
The three Rhode Islanders have had their innings with church figures.
Although Reed actually agrees that abortion is wrong, he gives greater allegiance to his reading of the U.S. Constitution.
When he was a congressman, a priest called him a "name-only Catholic" and, in an editorial, The Providence Visitor, official newspaper of the diocese, asked Catholics to pray for him, something Reed took in stride. But Kennedy likened it to a "witch hunt."
In 2003, another priest wrote to The Visitor to complain that Senator Reed spoke in a Catholic church -- at an ecumenical service to support National Guard troops -- and then voted against the late-term abortion ban.
As for Kennedy -- that same year, The Visitor published a scathing commentary in which Auxiliary Bishop Robert McManus assailed his views on same-sex marriage as "erroneous," "insulting," and "uninformed." Kennedy, who supports gay marriage, had dubbed the church's opposition "bigotry or discrimination."
You may also remember the flap that arose in 1996 after Kennedy told me he thought women should be able to be priests and that he hoped the church soon "crawls out of the Stone Age." The Visitor ran a headline, "Kennedy Attacks the Church." After talking with Bishop Louis Gelineau, Kennedy issued a statement sticking to his view but regretting his choice of words.
As for Langevin's promotion of stem-cell research, the congressman says, "The church has been very clear they don't support my position." He said both Bishop Robert Mulvee and Auxiliary Bishop McManus had spoken to him about it. "We agreed to disagree," he says.
If Langevin had a chance, what would he tell Pope Benedict about the topic? He said he would say, "Being pro-life, in addition to fighting to protect life in the womb, also has to be about caring for those people who are living among us, who suffer and deal with some of life's most challenging conditions and diseases, and that we also need to support efforts to extend and improve their quality of life."
Langevin's touting stem-cell research is informed by the paralyzing injuries he sustained when he was accidentally shot as a teenager. Similarly, he says his opposition to abortion is based less on church doctrine and more on his gratitude for surviving the accident and his belief that everyone should have a chance to live.
Interestingly, last May, Langevin joined 47 other Catholic House Democrats -- most of whom were "pro-choice" -- in signing a letter warning U.S. bishops that denying communion to pols who support abortion rights would be a disaster. (A few bishops had threatened to deny communion to presidential candidate John Kerry.)
Last week, Langevin told me it would be wrong for the church to be "punitive and heavy-handed" on this and added, "I don't believe you're going to change people's positions or behavior. If anything, it's just going to drive people out of the church."
He also spoke of the possibility that the church would deny communion based on stands on other issues as well.
As the letter asked:
"Will an individual bishop decide to deny communion to a legislator -- Republican or Democrat -- who has voted in favor of the death penalty? Will another bishop decide to deny communion to a legislator who authorized the war in Iraq?"
Langevin said he felt free to sign the letter, addressed to Cardinal Theodore McCarrick of Washington, because, "Just as we welcome the guidance of the church in our personal life, I hope the church welcomes our guidance if it's going to choose to become involved in politics and policy."
In November, the bishops' conference left the communion matter up to individual bishops. Although the church in Rhode Island certainly has been outspoken about abortion, it has not denied communion to "pro-choice" politicians.
A snafu kept Kennedy from signing the letter, but the congressman told me last week that he supported its sentiments.
Kennedy said he hopes that Pope Benedict, having such firm credentials among conservatives, will feel free to bring the church around to be more representative of the views of rank-and-file Catholics. He said an analogy would be President Richard Nixon's overture to Communist China. Nixon had the trust of conservatives; a more liberal politician might not have gotten away with what at the time seemed a breathtaking departure.
As for what Kennedy would like to see changed, one field he ventured into was Cardinal Ratzinger's inveighing against "relativism" and portraying Catholicism as an exclusive road to salvation.
Kennedy said:
"I am very concerned with the notion that if you are not a Catholic you are denied salvation. That's a pretty difficult, by any stretch, position to put forward. I think it certainly seems to me inconsistent with the life of communion that Jesus had with the disciples and with everybody else he came across."
He said Pope Benedict's bridge-building comments at Mass seemed to contradict his earlier stand. "You've got to choose one or the other," Kennedy said.
Kennedy said he continues to be upset over issues of "human dignity and equality" -- the church's refusal to let women be priests and its condemnation of homosexual behavior.
Incidentally, while Langevin and Reed oppose gay marriage, they do support civil unions; the church opposes both.
One issue on which all three men come out on the same side as the church is opposition, in general, to physician-assisted suicide, although it's not clear how much of a role the church's view plays in their thinking.
Of course, it is not just Catholic politicians who must weigh government issues against religious beliefs, although certainly you hear more talk from Catholic authorities calling on Catholic politicians to vote a certain way.
Reed says it's always difficult when men and women of conscience differ with you on something, whether they are motivated by theology or something else. It's nice to have people agree with you, he says. "But if you're like that, don't go into public life."
M. Charles Bakst, The Journal's political columnist, can be reached by e-mail at mbakst [at] projo.com
Don't let the door in your in the behind Catholic politicians who support abortion!
I think Pope Benedict will stand up to the Kennedys and others of his ilk, but I seriously doubt whether many American bishops will make it stick. These guys are only "Catholics" because, after all, who cares about the "Episcopalian vote"?
Putz Kennedy. This apple didn't fall far from the tree.
The Pope is cautious on 'so-called' Catholic politicians.
Reminds me of a tee-shirt I once saw:
Nietsche is Dead - God
They might be surprised to know that the church has deep concerns about where they're heading.
Small minds have trouble grasping the concept of an "eternal truth". As if Christ will change himself to suit these scum.
Langevin said it is as hard to predict how a pope will govern as it is to predict how a new Supreme Court justice will vote.
I heard Mark Levin on a radio talk show say that the USSC justices who "grow in office" tend to be those who hang with the DC social set in their off hours. So far, at least, we've been spared a Pope who does so!
Perhaps, just perhaps, this says more about the lack of commitment to the faith on the part of these politicians than anything about the Pope.
Catholic politicians or Catholic Democrats?
I wonder how Langevin gets away with pro-life votes as a northern Democrat. I just looked at the ACU website and they give him a lifetime score of 18% and a 2004 score of 25% (4 years in Congress)...of the two votes that were clearly connected to pro-life issues, of the 25 votes they rated people on, he voted the right way on both.
"Interestingly, last May, Langevin joined 47 other Catholic House Democrats -- most of whom were "pro-choice" -- in signing a letter warning U.S. bishops that denying communion to pols who support abortion rights would be a disaster".
Gee, what happened to that sacred "separation of church and state thing"? A bunch of politicians dictating Church doctorine?
Translation: "Here's hoping Benedict XVI will abandon his principles and become spineless, like a Republican politician!"
In New England, often Democrats can be more socially conservative than the Republicans.
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!
Ummmmmm, I don't think so! ;-)
Oh, I get it. "Overlook our perversions, it makes us uncomfortable! Can't we all just get along?"
Hey, separation of church & state is a one-way street! Didn't you get the memo?" ;-)
Presumably hasn't set his sights on the Dem presidential nomination yet! It follows as the day the night that a Dem pol with higher aspirations goes pro-abort. (Even Ted Kennedy used to be anti-abortion.)
Maybe I'm shortchanging him. But I wouldn't count on it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.