The Bishop and the Atheist

Priests for Life ^ | 3-6-03 | Fr. Frank Pavone

[cpforlife.org]

The Bishop and the Atheist
Fr. Frank Pavone's Bi-weekly Column
Priests for Life

Sun, 6 Apr 2003

Bishop William Weigand of Sacramento has something to say to pro-abortion politicians who claim to be Catholic. So does Doris Gordon, an atheist and the founder of "Libertarians for Life."

On January 22, 2003, Bishop Weigand preached the following words:

"As your bishop, I have to say clearly that anyone - politician or otherwise - who thinks it is acceptable for a Catholic to be pro-abortion is in very great error, puts his or her soul at risk, and is not in good standing with the Church. Such a person should have the integrity to acknowledge this and choose of his own volition to abstain from receiving Holy Communion until he has a change of heart."

He made explicit that fact that his words have direct application to Gray Davis, the Governor of California, who is pro-abortion and says he is Catholic. The bishop's homily made national news. And many of the faithful are saying It's about time.

Yet to speak this way is the duty of a bishop. More surprising to many is that an atheist would say the same. My friend, Doris Gordon, founded "Libertarians for Life" (www.L4L.org) and recently wrote an article, "A Libertarian Atheist Answers ‘Pro-Choice Catholics.’" She issues this challenge:

"The Church holds that such children are human persons with rights, yet the "personally opposed" hold that it should be a woman's choice to destroy themIf there is a credible reason for such a position, what is it? Opposition to legal abortion cuts across the religious and political spectrum. I'm an atheist. I was born and raised Jewish. Catholicism had nothing to do with my coming to understand why abortion is a wrong, not a right, and why it should not be legal."

Both Bishop Weigand and Doris Gordon are calling for consistency. If one claims to be Catholic, he/she should accept the teachings of Catholicism. It's as simple as that. Holy Communion, moreover, reinforces the need for consistency. Communion means "union with." To receive Communion is not magic. It is, rather, the summit and source of all our efforts to think, desire, choose, and live in union with Jesus Christ. When one knows the definitive teaching of Jesus as expressed in the Church, and deliberately refuses to accept it, he/she rejects "communion" at that moment. It no longer makes sense to receive physically the One whom you have rejected by clinging to your own conflicting doctrine.

Moreover, both the bishop and the atheist are saying that abortion is wrong not because the Church says so, but because of what abortion is. The taking of a child's life is simply not a civilized act. Nor is stealing. The Church teaches against stealing, but we don't hear people complain that laws against stealing are an imposition of religious doctrine. They realize that stealing does not only violate religious doctrine; it violates basic human rights. So does abortion. That truth isn't so hard to understand. But if we forget, then fortunately, we have both bishops and atheists to help us.

[O.C. - Old Cracker]

They weren't complaining at the time; the current complaints smack of opportunism.

*Yawn* That remark smacks of knee jerk Jesuit Jew-bashing. Come back when you've donned the ol' brain beenie.

[MrLeRoy]

That remark smacks of knee jerk Jesuit Jew-bashing.

When you can't win on facts or logic, accuse them of bigotry. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

[O.C. - Old Cracker]

When you can't win on facts or logic, accuse them of bigotry. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

I was merely responding to your previous inane reply. When you have something to say that adequately answers my charge, then I will respond more reasonably. Until that time, your posts to me will be granted the attention they deserve.

[MrLeRoy]

When you have something to say that adequately answers my charge

Already done: "They weren't complaining at the time."

[MrLeRoy]

Why was post #21 removed?

[O.C. - Old Cracker]

Already done: "They weren't complaining at the time."

Inadequate.

[nickcarraway]

BUMP

[Antoninus]

You might also ask where the church was during the Holocaust in Europe.

The Church was in Europe, rescuing close to a million Jews from the gas chambers and, as quoted by the NY Times in 1942, (to paraphrase) "A lonely voice of opposition to Hitler on the Continent."

You've bought into a leftist lie.

[O.C. - Old Cracker]

See my response (post #20) to MrLeRoy who voiced an objection similar to yours. End of story.

[SB00]

The charge that Pius XII supported the Holocaust is an outright lie, and rightfully, no historian supports that charge. This was based on the FICTITIOUS play called "The Deputy" written by German and anti-Catholic playwright Rolf Hochhuth. Unfortunately too many people bought into this as truth.

[Antoninus]

See my response (post #20) to MrLeRoy who voiced an objection similar to yours. End of story.

You post the opinion of one particular Jew and claim to have won the debate? A fellow closer to the issue, the head Rabbi of Rome during WWII had a different opinion. After the war, he converted to Catholicism and took the name "Eugenio" -- the first name of Pius XII.

OC = Old & Confused.