Posted on 05/03/2008 6:58:15 PM PDT by Alex Murphy
Bill Donohue may not be tired of the culture warsor internecine Catholic wars. The head of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights is often over the top in denunciations of anti-Catholicism, real or perceived, and of other Catholics who Donohue sees as not toeing the proper Catholic line. But even Donohue may have outdone himself, and done in his own organization, if his latest press release prompts an IRS investigation.
The May 2 release is Catholic Dissidents Advise Obama, and it draws down on Obamas Catholic National Advisory Committee, which includes several Commonwealers, such as Cathleen Kaveny and Grant Gallicho. It also includes Catholics in public and religious life, ranging from Sen. Bob Casey of Pennsylvania to the Sister of St. Joseph, Sr. Catherine Pinkerton. Also included are more than a few writers and theologians whose work I have long admired. Point of disclosure: I have also known Bill Donohue for years, and while I think he is completely wrongheaded many times, and inimical to the churchs well-being other times, he can also be a good guy to have a beer with, as well as someone who does not run from an argument, and an advocate who can point out indisputable cases of anti-Catholicism that still persist.
That said, this latest blast is way outta line. Donohue not only labels these Obama-advising Catholics as dissidents but he says Practicing Catholics have every right to be insulted by Obamas advisory groupsetting up Catholics who back Obama as bad Catholics and opponents of Obama, by implication, as good Catholics. Donohue employs his favorite trick of the invidiousand distortingcomparison, saying he wouldnt have gay advisors who dont reflect the sentiment of the gay communityas if these Obama-backers dont reflect Catholic opinion. (In fact, they largely do. Not that this should be about public opinion, no?)
In his closing, Donohue takes a real potshot, saying that If these are the best committed Catholic leaders, scholars and advocates Obama can find, then it is evident that he has a Wright problem when it comes to picking Catholic advisors. As if these Catholicscheck out the listare the equivalent of Jeremiah Wright !
But let me dissect this a bit more analytically. I see four chief problems.
One is that Donohue bases his criticism of these dozens of advisors principally on the scores that the abortion rights group NARAL gives some of the political figures on the committee (conveniently not mentioning the presence of Democrats Bob Casey and Tim Roemer, also on Obamas committee, who have taken stands against abortion rights in many cases). Donohue also states that Obamas pol pals do not agree with the churchs three major public policy issues: abortion, embryonic stem cell research and school vouchers. That is a rather selective list, in that the bishops own statement on political participation, titled Faithful Citizenship, lists seven principal policy areas, and they include Option for the Poor and Vulnerable, Dignity of Work and the Rights of Workers, and Caring for Gods Creation. Not to mention the churchs opposition to the Iraq War, which John McCain wants to continue.
Indeed, while Donohue has criticized McCains alliance with the rock-ribbed televangelist and preacher of standard anti-Catholic rhetoric, John Hagee, he has not brought similar scrutiny to McCains own Catholic advisory board.
And that raises the second problem, which was noted by the liberal group, Catholics United, namely that Donohues apparent partisanship could jeopardize the Leagues 501c3 non-profit status. Catholics United also cites passages from Onward Christian Solders, a new book by Deal Hudsona longtime GOP advisorthat show how Donohue has been active in helping the Bush White House and the Republican Party woo the Catholic vote.
This adds up to a big potential problem for Donohue. Yet it also adds up to a big payday for him. As the Leagues publicly-available financial forms show, Donohue takes in a whopping $343,000 a year in salary and compensation. He can rightly claim that he has turned the League from a penny-ante mom-and-pop shop into the $20-million-dollar a year culture war machine that it is. But while few would disagree with fighting anti-Catholicism, I wonder how many will see Donohue as getting rich off anti-Catholicism.
A final point: Pope Benedict XVI, who Donohue spares no effort to defend, even when the pontiff is not under attack, made an explicit call during last months visit for Catholics to seek unity, not division. Im not sure how Donohues internecine and potentially partisan sniping achieves that end, or even how attacking other Catholics connects with fighting anti-Catholicism.
**No, I am not P-Marlowe. And I am also not Calvinist.**
P-Marlowe is a Calvinist???
All the Admin Moderators have equal authority to pull threads, posts, suspend, ban, etc. regardless of forum. The few that can login as "Religion Moderator" include those with the greatest authority, e.g. Jim Robinson.
I don’t know and don’t care.
Another fun thread on the Religion Forum, I see. I guess I’ll go back out to the garden.
"Recognizable language" is not a problem to me - several posters quote my warnings especially when they post a devotional or caucus evidently anticipating the disruptors.
8~)
***I have had many posters tell me why they are not here any more. ***
As have I Sandy, as have I. They are tired of the roman screed they are constantly bombarded with.
LOL!
I’ve stayed away from the Religion side mostly for a while, largely because of the problems you’re talking about (non- and/or anti-Catholics allowed to constantly post Catholic threads).
***Is Alex Murphy a moderator?***
I’ve always found him fair and balanced.
As a matter of policy, the Moderators conceal their identities. Therefore I cannot answer your question. However, established poster - you included - should be treated respectfully as if he or she is a Moderator.
I've always found him fair and balanced.
lol.
And he dresses well.
Time and again we've seen that disagreeing with Catholic doctrine or Rome or the RCC is viewed by many Catholics as "dumping on."
There are VERY few posts by Protestants that do not offer Scriptural evidence for their disagreements with Rome.
And somehow that seems to really rile the RCC.
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.