Posted on 02/12/2010 10:09:32 AM PST by NYer
Over 750 "tea parties" were held on April 15 of last year, protesting the excesses of the Obama administration -- in particular, the pork-stuffed stimulus bill. Initially, the mainstream media tried to ignore the movement. They downplayed its size and influence, until the steady slide of President Obama's popularity, the growing opposition to Congress's health-care reform proposals, and Republican victories in New Jersey, Virginia, and Massachusetts forced them to acknowledge its influence.
Since then, the media strategy has been to portray the tea party as a gathering of disgruntled extremists, in spite of the fact that the limits on government spending they advocate would have been considered common sense in both political parties only a decade ago.
For American Catholics, the equivalent of centralized federal power is the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB). The USCCB, the kind of episcopal conference authorized by Vatican II, has no canonical authority of its own. But its voice is considered authoritative by the media, and it is treated as such by those who applaud its lobbying efforts in Congress and the White House.
Criticism of the USCCB among lay Catholics, as well as many priests and bishops, has been a constant since its march to the political left in the years after its creation in 1966. Pastoral letters, including the ones on the economy (1986) and war and peace (1983), created a clear line of demarcation between the liberal politics of the conference (aligned with the Democratic Party) and the Catholics, both lay and religious, who interpreted the Church's social teaching differently (in a way inclining them toward conservatism and the GOP.)
The pro-life advocacy of the conference, along with its opposition to same-sex marriage, has always set it apart from other politically liberal institutions. Unfortunately, the USCCB's choice of coalition partners and memberships often threaten to undermine the clarity of its witness.
Nowhere is this better illustrated than in the series of reports from the Reform CCHD Now Coalition. These reports show two things clearly:
1. Bishops have given Catholic money to organizations advocating abortion and same-sex marriage (two such organizations were defunded last November).
2. The bishops have joined coalitions, like the Leadership Conference for Civil and Human Rights, that also advocate abortion and same-sex marriage.
These reports differ from previous attempts to address the politics of the USCCB in two ways: First, their Internet links allow anyone to read the various smoking guns unearthed by the research. The second factor is timing -- the reports come after both the 2008 presidential election and the furor surrounding Notre Dame's decision to bestow an honor on a pro-abortion president.
The Notre Dame incident brought home to thousands of Catholics, in a way they had never understood before, that many venerable mainstream Catholic institutions were strongholds of dissent.
Yet the Notre Dame story might not have gone so far if many Catholics were not already furious with the role a bishops' document played in the election of Barack Obama in the first place.
The 2007 version of the bishops' "Faithful Citizenship" document, prepared in advance for distribution for the 2008 election, contained several passages that, if taken out of context, gave the green light to Catholic voters to ignore Obama's aggressively pro-abortion stance. (Obama won the self-identified Catholic vote over Sen. John McCain 54 percent to 44 percent, though among religiously active Catholics he lost by 1 percentage point.)
That document did not emerge from the USCCB without a fight -- a number of bishops opposed it; I am told that Archbishop Raymond Burke, then still in St. Louis, was literally shouted down when he tried to explain his opposition to the problematic passages. The best any bishop has been able to say to me regarding "Faithful Citizenship" is that "it was difficult, it was a compromise."
But such compromises are brewing a tempest for a potential tea party revolution among the faithful. In some ways, the very notion of a tea party goes against the grain for Catholics, with their inbred sense of deference to authority. Those same Catholics, however, are beginning to realize that there are some matters where they can speak out without acting in disobedience to the authority of their bishop.
In response to my recent story on the USCCB's membership in a pro-abortion civil rights organization, a Notre Dame alumnus from the class of 1965 sent me this message: "Is it time for us to start throwing tea bags at the USCCB?" This is a man who, ten years ago, would not tolerate a word uttered against either Notre Dame or the bishops. The times may be changing.
Ping!
Good luck with that.
Yeah baby
If a majority of Catholics voted him in, what would they disagree with. You got your dead babies, your homosexual advocate, your anti Jesus Muslim, your anti God commie, buddies with Hugo Chavez, Che T shirt wearers,....whats not to like? Sounds like your average Catholic liberal agenda.
Why would Catholics need their own Tea Party? We all need to stick together and work together.
Apparently neither of you read the article. The "tea party" is internal with regard to some bishops.
Interesting.
The part about Catholics deference to authority is very interesting.
The USCCB, as I understand it, is not an authority and it is, in deed, they who are violating the Authority of the Church.
Something has to be done. It is clear that Catholics were given carte blanche to vote for Obama, despite his radical abortion beliefs.
The USCCB is a scandal. Should be disbanded.
Like most American Jews, they’ll just stab you in the back and vote LibTard anyway.
Not at all. There are too many Catholics, however, who were poorly catechized, and put far too much stock in the 'fundamental option for the poor', which was all the rage with the Bishop's Conference in the 80s. Those Catholics ignored Obama's support for abortion, because they considered the Democrats to be better for poor people than the Republicans.
The voting guide put out by the Bishops was ambiguous, but there were plenty of Bishops who were very outspoken all through 2008, speaking out against the party of abortion, and there were not that many Catholics who didn't hear the statements the Bishops made.
Now, in America, we have a majority now of the Kennedy, Pelosi, Kerry, type Catholic. Obama got the majority of Catholics to vote for him. How did that happen? Somebody isn't giving the right message from the Church. The big question for the article is "Are Bishops telling the priests what to teach, or are the priests a bunch of rouges going against the Church. It has to be one or the other. If the Church says abortion is murder, how do we vote so many murderers into office? I repeat, a majority of Catholics voted for Obama. Father Phlager wasn't thrown out of his office even supporting the most vile, anti Christian philosophy out there.
As far as "We all need to stick together and work together", goes, We all need to follow God and not men should be the call. It is men that is dividing the church today. If the powers that be can't discipline their troops, then they need to be removed. The Church needs to realize Jesus wanted the CHURCH to feed the poor, not the government. The socialist bent to the Catholic Church ISN'T Biblical. This has been brewing for decades now and will end up splitting the Church. Along with welfare programs comes the baby killing, the homosexual agenda, the anti God agenda, and so forth. If the Bishops want a "Tea Party", will they end up with a liberal agenda, or a Godly agenda? I'm not that confident.
Remember awhile back, many citizens wanted another Constitution Convention? After thinking about it for awhile, we figured we would lose the 1st, 2nd, 4th, and probably many more Amendments if we had one today. If you allow a bunch of Bishops to gather to protest, you may be surprised at what we end up with. My money says you wouldn't be happy with what you got out of it. Even the pope has been against our wars, even to dump the most vile murdering dictators. If the Bishops aren't happy with what's going on, who's fault is that? ( Just another reminder that a majority of Catholics voted for Obama)
If the Church can't handle the liberal wing of the Church now, what good would it do to have a "Tea Party"? Might as well split off and form a conservative Bible believing wing of the Catholic Church, because women priests, homosexual marriage, and all the rest are on their way in the present Church. Maybe we could get Pelosi as our first female Cardinal.
Sorry for the rant, but this has been burning me forever. Anytime you say anything about it, you get labeled a "Basher". The truth is staring us in the face, and frankly, many Catholics have their heads in the sand and refuse to open their eyes to the majority of Catholics, priests, Bishops and all.
“The voting guide put out by the Bishops was ambiguous”
That was all they needed to cast aside the Church’s view on Life and vote for “the one”
Ref: Attached Document, USCCB John Carr
Dear Bishop Stika,
As it happens, I worked for the USCCB (then NCCB) in 1986-87, at the lowly munchkin level. I heard, even then, disturbing things about John Carr’s politics, his staff, and his allies. Call it discretion on my part or call it sloth, but I never inquired further. I wasn’t Deputy Sheriff for the Suppression of Bad Guys; and I reasoned that if there were any truth to it, the responsible people “higher up” would sort it all out.
So, it turns out that the executive director of the USCCB Department of Justice Peace and Human Development was at the same time Chairman of the Board of the Center for Community Change (CCC). And Carr’s “relationship” with the CCC, including as an officer and a speaker, goes back 24 years.
And the CCC is part of the Abortion Rights coalition fighting to stop the pro-life Stupak amendment:
http://www.politico.com/livepulse/1109/Abortion_rights_groups_form_coalition_to_fight_Stupak.html
Unsurprisingly, this has damaged to my confidence in the “responsible people higher up.”
It’s popish fussbudgetry on my part, perhaps, but I have never willingly contributed to any organization that joined forces with gay rights and abortion advocacy: not to NOW; nor to the Democratic Party (though, child and grandchild of the Left, I had a kind of inherited distrust for Republicans); nor to Planned Parenthood; nor even, God help me, to the CCHD.
Must I now keep my few measly bucks away from the USCCB? This miserable political shilling, and these funding shell games, keep happening over and over again, and they are mighty disheartening to the faithful pew-sitters. We don’t expect the Church (via USCCB/CCHD and the rest of the alphabet soup), to fight every secular battle for us. At this point, we would be well satisfied if we knew they weren’t fighting against us.
I have every confidence in you and in your people and in this Diocese. Can you do something about the USCCB as Bishop? Or are you truly as powerless as we are? To whom else can I turn?
With respect for you and prayers for God’s gracious favor upon you,
And asking your blessing,
[signed]
Bellarmine Veritas Ministry: Revisiting the Center for Community Change (01 February 2010)
http://bellarmineveritasministry.org/2010/02/01/revisiting-the-center-for-community-change/
LifeNews
http://www.lifenews.com/nat5954.html
None of these deviations and disorders are 'on their way' in the present Church. There are plenty of poorly-catechized Catholics who would support such things, and of course there are wacky activists who would promote it (some of them people with strings of academic credentials in high places), but there is no possibility of their changing the doctrines of the Church. Period. Full stop.
The disorders still have to be fought: fight on, I say.
Oh, and see mine at #14.
The Catholic people, laity and religious, should rise up in "tea party" fashion and tell all the bishops that the pastoral advice of this Council is mired in the 1960s, has failed, and should be abandoned.
That being done, then any and all reforms that are deemed necessary can be adopted on a case-by-case basis without an oecumenical council. That way if something seems not to be working, it can be easily amended or jetissoned.
I have a question and don’t know how to find the answer.
I was listening to EWTN radio today.. I thought I understood the gentleman to say that a portion of your weekly contribution to your parish goes to USCCB.
Is this correct?
My parish didn’t have a collection for them this year.
Ultimately, anyone who is willing to countenance, and vote to encourage, the murders of innocent children does NOT have the bests interests of anyone at heart, except themselves, because they think voting that way will continue to get them elected to office.
I will say this: I think the Manhattan Declaration is lame.
Not sure how it works in your area. In my parish, the weekly envelopes go to the parish, albeit a very small one, operating on a shoestring budget. There is an annual collection for the bishop's fund. This is commitment based. And there is usually one for the USCCB but that envelope is clearly labeled and announced accordingly. My suggestion would be to approach your pastor and pose the same question.
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.