Posted on 09/27/2010 6:17:29 AM PDT by markomalley
Over the past two weeks, I've had extensive discussions with a wide group of Catholic leaders about the state of the Church in the United States. The frustration and impatience among Catholics, which I discussed last February in "Is It Time for a Catholic Tea Party?," continue to grow.
The occasions for this discussion were the Catholic Leadership Conference held in Philadelphia earlier this month, immediately followed by the Faith & Freedom Coalition Conference and the 15th Annual Partnership Dinner benefiting InsideCatholic, both held in Washington, D.C.
The broad background for this discontent is well known: Lay Catholics cannot understand why, over the past 30 years, more bishops haven't taken a stronger public stand on Catholic politicians who openly dissent on life and marriage issues.
This level of discontent remained at a simmer until the 2008 presidential campaign and the election of Barack Obama as president -- at which point it reached a boil. From parishes around the nation came reports of priests and lay staff making clear their preference for Obama, in some cases arguing openly that their support for Obama was offset by "proportionate reasons," such as Sen. John McCain's support for the Iraq War.
When the concerned faithful began to hunt down this "proportionate reasons" argument, they found it in the bishops' own 2007 document, "Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship: A Catholic Call to Political Responsibility." Stunned Catholics wondered aloud how the bishops themselves could have provided Obama's Catholic supporters the very argument they needed to rebut any concern about his advocacy for infanticide as a state senator.
In response to the outcry, a record number of bishops issued statements during the presidential campaign either seeking to clarify "Faithful Citizenship" or to correct misinterpretations of the Catholic faith set forth by Rep. Nancy Pelosi and Sen. Joe Biden. Yet none of them targeted the grassroots and parish-based campaign efforts of pro-Obama groups, like Catholics in Alliance, using the "proportionate reasons" argument to distract Catholic voters from Obama's abortion record.
The one bishop to confront this interpretation of "Faithful Citizenship" head-on was Bishop Joseph Martino in Scranton, Pennsylvania, who famously interrupted the speakers to say, "No USCCB document is relevant in this diocese. The USCCB doesn't speak for me. The only relevant document… is my letter. There is one teacher in this diocese, and these points are not debatable."
Obama was elected with the help of the self-identified Catholic vote, though weekly Mass-attending Catholics slightly preferred McCain. Some Obama sympathizers publicly applauded his election given the history of racism in our nation, and although they never explicitly called this a "proportionate reason," it was certainly treated as such.
President Obama's record has, unsurprisingly, tracked closely to his record as an Illinois state senator. Immediately discarding the Mexico City Policy upon his election, he has undone, or sought to undo, every aspect of the "abortion reduction" policy put in place by the Bush administration.
Most importantly, he found a way around the Hyde Amendment by inserting a massive abortion mandate in his health-care legislation. With the passage of Obamacare and the inability of USCCB lobbying efforts to either defeat it or strip out its abortion funding loopholes, many lay Catholics have come to assume a Tea Party posture of "enough is enough."
Many of them wonder why Sr. Carol Keehan, president of the Catholic Health Association, is still in the good graces of the USCCB. It was Sister Keehan, after all, who neutralized the bishops' opposition to the health-care bill and denied the presence of its abortion funding.
Sister Keehan has become a virtual symbol of what is wrong with the Church: There is no accountability, and no consequences for open dissent on the preeminent moral issues. Thus, when it came to light that the Catholic Campaign for Human Development of the USCCB has been funding organizations that openly support abortion and gay marriage, the reaction of the laity was a cynical "more of the same."
Some of the leadership I spoke with cited examples of overall improvement in episcopal leadership, both in individual dioceses and at the USCCB, and warned of becoming too negative.
Attention to tone is always important, but the simple fact is this: Of the 97 Democrat Catholic members of the House, only 9 voted against a health-care bill containing abortion funding, in spite of the fact that the USCCB and cardinals like Justin Rigali and Francis George spoke out clearly against it. (All 38 GOP House members voted against the bill.)
Something has gone wrong when those who publicly profess the Catholic faith feel no compunction about openly defying its teachings at the urging of their bishops. On top of that, a group called "Catholics United" announces it will spend $500,000 to reelect those same politicians, all Democrats -- and not a single bishop makes any comment.
The Catholic tea kettle continues to boil, as the patience of many of the lay faithful is running out.
ping
How about a Council of Trent party?
Is the orthodoxy of one’s Roman Catholicism now measured in this country by where one falls on a political spectrum?
I was recently with an Orthodox hierarch (a real conservative) and a group of clergy and laity. When the discussion turned to a possible reunion of Rome with the Orthodox churches, one of the main concerns expressed by the participants was the, to us, incredible politicization of Roman Catholicism and the Roman Catholic Church in America.
>>How about a Council of Trent party?<<
I like your idea.
This stuck out in this article...
“There is no accountability, and no consequences for open dissent on the preeminent moral issues. “
Really, there is no accountability anywhere.
As of Advent, we have a new English Translation of the Missal. Even in our parish, I have seen NOTHING about this.
What happens if parishes don’t use it? What happens if it’s business as usual with the “Jesus, Prince of Peace” for the Agnus Dei? Or adding whatever to the Eucharistic Prayer? What is done?
Nothing. Which is why parishes in Cleveland don’t kneel before communion and use the “stick um up”/modified Orans position for the Our Father. Nothing is done to correct it, in most Diocese.
“When the concerned faithful began to hunt down this “proportionate reasons” argument, they found it in the bishops’ own 2007 document, “Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship: A Catholic Call to Political Responsibility.” Stunned Catholics wondered aloud how the bishops themselves could have provided Obama’s Catholic supporters the very argument they needed to rebut any concern about his advocacy for infanticide as a state senator.”
No, orthodoxy is orthodoxy, and it shouldn't be measured by a political system. Many Catholics are falling into this error. Catholics aligning themselves with certain political parties or movements is fine for politics but when we are talking about God, The Church, The Mass, let us all be orthodox.
In November 2008, FReeper all the best posted his take on where the Catholic church has gone wrong in guiding American voters. I think he absolutely nailed it:
Show me just one Catholic bishop who will speak up against coveting your neighbors’ goods. That is why Catholics ignored the Bishops on abortion. They know abortion is wrong but overlooked the Dems on that point because those same politicians pandered to their covetousness. Same for protestants and evangelical pastors, leaders and activists. American politics and government at all levels is driven by government-mediated coveting. Until the Church takes a stand against this we can expect to sink deeper and deeper into socialism and, oh yeah, abortion.
We can fly yellow flags with the word Anathema on it!
This will be happening 2011. I know priests and deacons in my parish are actively going for training.
You are very blessed.
There is nothing going on around here. Not a peep.
The new OCD Missal will have the new translation as far as I know. That comes in for Advent 2010. If I have that wrong and it begins in Advent 2011, I feel much better.
OH THANK YOU!!!!
Now I feel so much better! I thought that everyone was just ignoring it.
With several notable exceptions, unfortunately that is the basic consensus among the US bishops. And the place that the truly "orthodox" fall is to the hard left -- which, of course, means that I am a dissenter (in their eyes).
There are notable exceptions: Archbishop Chaput is a big one; Archbishop Nienstedt; Bishop Finn; Bishop Slattery. And others. But they are still in the minority.
A big part of the problem is the curia within the USCCB. I posted an article a few days ago that highlighted the problems with it and it is not likely to change anytime soon.
A big part of the problem is that the USCCB bureaucrats are putting out half-teachings, particularly on social issues. Take, for example, this document, which was published in many church bulletins this week. This document outlines the following themes (if you wish to read the description of each "theme", you should click on the link above):
The problem is that this is not what the Catholic Church teaches.
What the Church teaches is this:
160. The permanent principles of the Church's social doctrine [ 341] constitute the very heart of Catholic social teaching. These are the principles of: the dignity of the human person, which has already been dealt with in the preceding chapter, and which is the foundation of all the other principles and content of the Church's social doctrine; [342] the common good; subsidiarity; and solidarity.
Or to outline it:
Everything else (family, work, environment, etc.) are applied within the above framework and hang off from one or more of the above principles and must be applied in light of those principles (with respect to the values of truth, freedom, and justice as well)
But unfortunately, you don't hear that out of the USCCB -- you get those seven squishy, politically correct "themes."
Now most priests and deacons don't really study social doctrine that intently in their formation process...and, it is rare to hear of anything other than a class being given by an ultraleftist training them in their one class on social doctrine. Consequently, the myth propagates.
And then, when you have a conservative bishop who actually understands social doctrine...his impact is minimized.
So yes, unfortunately, there is a political "orthodoxy" in our hierarchy. I think it is gradually changing...but I sure could go for a far faster change in this department. If, for no other reason, I hate continually being in a position of being required to be a dissenter to my own bishop as a condition to being faithful to the teachings of the Church.
bttt
Sign me up for the Catholic Tea Party!
Here in Tidewater VA, after too many years of Bish. Sullivan, an “anti-war”, lib dem lover, this area has a long way to go to dig itself out of the abyss. Many of the churches here don’t even have kneelers... and many don’t kneel before taking communion.
Also, some of our elected officials who call themselves “Catholics’ use the parish roster for fund raising...specifically Mamie Bacote, a state rep, who gives faithfully to Emily’s List...
Yes, I called the diocese to complain and they took a pass...so I will this Bishop’s Appeal cycle...
I sure support it.
ABSOLUTELY INDEED.
Roman Catholic bishops have a lot to answer for.
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.