Posted on 03/07/2006 5:22:25 PM PST by madprof98
Tired of playing political punching bag to bishops and others who question their religious commitment, 55 House Democrats issued a “Catholic Statement of Principles” Feb. 28 that acknowledges the “church’s guidance and assistance” but also “the primacy of conscience.”
The 500-word statement rejects what its sponsors see as a narrow focus on abortion by some church leaders at the expense of other “basic principles that are at the heart of Catholic social teaching,” such as reducing poverty, promoting universal health care coverage and “taking seriously the decision to go to war.” Among the prominent signatories were such pro-choice stalwarts as House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., Patrick Kennedy, D-R.I., and Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., but also such strongly pro-life Democrats as Bart Stupak, D-Mich., James Oberstar, D-Minn., and Dale Kildee, D-Minn.
The statement is part of the continuing fallout from the 2004 elections in which a small number of high-profile bishops said they would deny the Eucharist to Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry, a pro-choice Catholic, if he presented himself for Communion in their dioceses. Other bishops urged pro-choice Catholic legislators to refrain from taking Communion.
The “Statement of Catholic Principles” is not the first time many of the same Catholic lawmakers have challenged church leaders who question their voting records. Declaring that “it would be wrong for a bishop to deny the sacrament of holy Communion to an individual on the basis of a voting record,” two-thirds of the Catholic Democrats in the House of Representatives told Washington Cardinal Theodore McCarrick in a May 10, 2004, letter that such actions are “counterproductive and would bring great harm to the church.” McCarrick chairs a committee charged with advising bishops on their dealings with legislators.
“We … are increasingly concerned about statements made recently by some members of the Catholic hierarchy indicating that the sacrament of Communion should be withheld from certain Catholic legislators because of their votes on public issues,” the Democrats said. McCarrick later met with representatives of the House Democrats.
“For too long,” DeLauro, chief architect of the statement, told NCR, “we have been silent about who we are as Democratic Catholics and for too long people have defined many of us who are pro-choice as in fact celebrating abortion. It’s time for us to say who we are [and] how we look at a whole variety of programs.
“We are flatly stating who we are and what we are all about,” said DeLauro. Prior to her election to Congress in 1990, DeLauro served as executive director of EMILY’s List, a political action committee dedicated to electing pro-choice women to Congress.
“We envision a world in which every child belongs to a loving family and agree with the Catholic church about the value of human life and the undesirability of abortion,” said the statement. “Each of us is committed to reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies and creating an environment with policies that encourage pregnancies to be carried to term. We believe this includes promoting alternatives to abortion, such as adoption, and improving access to children’s health care and childcare, as well as policies that encourage paternal and maternal responsibility.”
Some see the statement, billed as “historic” by its issuers, as a defining moment in the debate over a Catholic legislator’s obligation to church teaching.
“This document is calling us all to look again at the scope of Catholic social teaching and the nature of a moral act,” said Benedictine Sr. Joan Chittister, an NCR columnist who has been critical of those she says try to limit the scope of Catholic social teaching to narrowly-defined “life issues.” Chittister, along with Jesuit Frs. Thomas Reese, former editor of America magazine, and John Langan, professor of philosophy at Georgetown University, spoke at a July 2005 breakfast meeting of Catholic legislators hosted by DeLauro at her Capitol Hill townhouse.
“I was very impressed with both the anguish and commitment of these legislators,” said Chittister. “In a pluralistic society they know they are there to be as moral as they can be, but they do not see that they are there to legislate Catholic morality, especially in a society where other people of good faith are not as absolute [about abortion] as Catholics are,” said Chittister.
Others termed the statement more of the same from politicians on the defensive. “It’s the same-old, same-old, there’s nothing new here,” said Austin Ruse, president of the Washington-based Culture of Life Foundation. “The most offensive thing [about the statement],” said Ruse, “is that it casts abortion as a religious freedom issue,” where those who favor restrictions on abortion are said to be guilty of imposing their religious convictions on those who don’t share them. Public policy decisions related to abortion, said Ruse, “are quite separate from anybody’s faith.” Further, said Ruse, “while they say, ‘We do not celebrate its practice,’ they could not even say that every abortion is a tragedy.”
DeLauro said the group of Catholic legislators who worked on the statement will continue to meet informally and that its members hope for continued “dialogue” with bishops and other church leaders.
Joe Feuerherd is NCR Washington correspondent. His e-mail address is jfeuerherd@natcath.org.
Ah, yes, Joan Chittister . . . and Tom Reese, the media's 2nd-favorite Jesuit (assuming "Father" Drinan hasn't kicked the bucket yet) cozying up to abortion-loving DeLauro, I see. When Reese got the boot over at America, that was supposed to prove Benedict XVI was a right-wing reactionary. Seems to me that the Holy Father could very well give the boot to 55 more "Catholics" who signed this stupid letter.
These 55 people just don't get it,never have and most likely never will.
Or "Fr" McBrien from Notre Dame.
Why don't they join the Episcopal Church? Then they can believe whatever they like, and nobody will care. Surely if they can swallow the camel of abortion they won't strain at the gnat of Apostolic Succession?
ROLFMO...."the primacy of conscience"? Is that PC language that declares their conscience prevails over the infallibility of the Pope? So the church has a narrow focus on abortion that is subordinate to the basic principles on Catholic social teachings? I didn't know that. Is that the same thing as, "Let me cherry pick those things I like about the church and allow me to disregard the rest? Did 55 "Catholic" idiots just do that?
Prediction: Not one US bishop will take these people to task.
I can answer that question by posing another question: Did you ever hear political strategists talk about the importance of the "Episcopalian vote"?
No, but they sure do like the endowments, land, and pension plans . . .
That tells me how serious they "take their religious beliefs."
I pray that the RCC keeps the heat on....these heathens.
And these people put it in writing, no less!
Yea! I'm so glad to hear you're going forth with your plans to join us! I was wondering how it was going...
Kinda like muslims, these folks will say anything, do anything.
I have made 2 confessions! Believe me, this was a BIG hurdle, but I did it, and am very thankful that I did!
Ah, to be present at the advent of a new heresy... though I would like to ask these people if who determines whose conscience has primacy over doctrine.
Does Hitler's? He had a conscience mind to exterminate Jews and Catholics.
Does his conscience count?
No?
Is it because he was a murderer?
Then what's an abortion?
Funny story - our great old ironclad Irish priest was shaking hands after Mass, and I asked him, "Monsignor . . . I need to come to confession, should I make an appointment?" "Ah, just come at the usual time," said he, in that inimitable Irish brogue. "Well - it's going to be the Mother of All Confessions, because I've got 42 years' worth to deal with." "No problem, the usual time will be fine - " with an adumbrated wink " - we have very few sinners in this parish."
Another funny story - I made a list, naturally, with 42 years' worth (not counting the seven years I was technically incapable of sin). I heard about an old lady who got into the confessional, looked at her list, saw "Hamburger. Milk. Celery." and exclaimed loud enough to be heard in the aisle, "Oh my heavens! I left my sins in the A&P!"
I hope these Catholic demonRats didn't meet and discuss this on Federal property or during normal business hours, otherwise, it's a clear violation of church-state co-mingling.
letter that such actions are “counterproductive and would bring great harm to the church.”
Sounds like a threat to me !!!
Who's going down first?
A) The Catholic church for allowing priests to abuse children?
B) The Pols for allowing teachers to abuse children?
Whadda they gonna do? Pin their proclamation to the Capitol doors, a la Luther?
Because deep down their goal is to destroy the Church and remake it in their image and that is easier to do from the inside.
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.