As a sceptic, I have always been almost contemptuous of conspiracy theories. However the last couple of years, and especially clear in the recent controversy over President Obama speaking at Notre Dame University, one would have to be naive not to see a clear pattern emerging from the Catholic hierarchy.
Obviously the American hierarchy is regrouping from what they must see as almost a half century in the wilderness. After Vatican 2, the increased emphasis on the laity has not set well withe the princes of the Church. The Catholic reactionary movement led by Weigel, Chaput, George, Neuhaus, etc have worked furiously to regain its power, even to the extent of becomming basically an arm of the Republican party. Now we are at the Rubicon.
The bishops, obviously in close collaboration, have thrown down the gauntlet: Every effort must be made to prevent the President of the United States from being seen as anything but an evil and wicked man. The frenzied threats against Notre Dame for inviting Obama all sound quite similar. At least an indication of coordinated action.
It was obvious in the last election and is becomming more clear by the day, that the main goal of the hierarchy is to regain control of the laity, and to exalt their own position, by using the political process. All public officials who even remotely suggest that abortion has even a small but legitimate role in our society are clearly the enemies of God( i,e. the Church) and must be eliminated from public service. To be sure the issue is partly about abortion, but far more about the right of the hierarchy to dictate public morals and political action through their "sheep" (the laity).
After decades of trying to, quitely, unite the Church and the State, the Church is now openly trying to fuse its theology with American law, and dominate a nation open to all religious views. Its vehicle is the Republican party---now a blending of the evangelical right and reactionary Catholicism. The Church is making progress by aligning itself with every vestige of the American far right. But, I think what it does not see, is the real possibility of a new anti-catholicism stirring among the better educated. But for the prelates to regain their imperial status, is, to them, worth the risk of people viewing the Church as un-American and unwilling to accept a role in a democracy.
Certainly vicious attacks on the elected leader of the nation because of that leader's refusal to surrender his thinking to the dictates of the American catholic hierarchy,, may portend an outcome not favorable to the Church as an influence for good. Jack
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"After decades of trying to, quitely, unite the Church and the State, the Church is now openly trying to fuse its theology with American law, and dominate a nation open to all religious views."
ReplyDeleteTime to get back on the Haldol, dude.
I guess I speak the truth; because you can't respond. I notice you still hide under anon. Afraid, I guess. Jack
ReplyDeleteFirst, I will also have to hide behind the Anonymous label since there is no other way that I have found to enter a comment on these blogs (sigh). But you know who I am so I am sure I will hear from you :).
ReplyDeleteI have a little different outlook on it. I do agree that the bishops are trying to regain power, or at lest do something to draw people back into the Catholic Church. If Catholic marriages have indeed fallen by 50% over the last couple of years, and more Catholics than protestants believe that sex outside of marriage is permissible, then the bishops have indeed failed to lead their flock down moral paths.
I also think that the sexual abuse scandal has hit them hard, and part of the pro-life campaign is an attempt to divert attention from that debacle. Notice that not one bishop has come out and condemned any priest or any bishop for moved abusers around, and have fought legal measures with vigor. And while abortion is being fought as an "intrinsic" evil as opposed to war which is "sometimes justified", I have yet to think of a circumstance when sexual abuse of a child is justified. Doesn't that make it an intrinsic evil? Why no great outcry over that?
More back to the subject. I don't really believe that the bishops you have mentioned are willing to lay down their mantle of power in order to co-operate with other bishops. I do think they are willing to go with the flow in order to get press coverage. And in the case of Notre Dame I think they have sunk so low as to perform the equivalent of spitting on the American Flag in their attack on the President of the United States. Further, I think that the bishops have a tremendous chip on their shoulder if they really believe that anyone who does not believe what they say is anti-Catholic. Most people who disagree with them are not anti, they really don't care. But if the bishops continue insult them and demand compliance, their claim of anti-Catholic will by prophetic and self induced.
I do suspect that like the Catholic population, some percentage of the bishops are radical, but that most stand on the middle ground. I would hate to condemn these men by grouping them with the loud radicals.
Mike L
Just looked up Haldol. Had never heard of it. So I am going to say you were being "light." Of course, I know who you are.
ReplyDeleteI agree with much you say. BUT, and I am serious, please name some bishop(s) who are defending Notre Dame and the Obama invitation. I am not asking this as a retort to your comment, but as, maybe, a ray of hope. Who are those 'moderate' non-radical bishops. The truth is in the details, in this case names.:) Jack
Note that although I have to sign on as Anon, I do sign my postings, Jack. The Haldol is not one of my responses!
ReplyDeleteThe only bishop that I can think of that has come out, not exactly supporting the Notre Dame invitation, but at least asking for some reasonableness and civility was Bishop Quinn, who I understand is retired.
One problem is that, while I think it is wrong and shortsighted, the Council of Catholic Bishops did put out a guideline that said no one that promotes abortion publicly should be invited to or honored at a Catholic Institution. So a bishop that defends the invitation places himself in opposition to all the other bishops, not a good place.
I think that Notre Dame can be faulted for the invitation, but the resulting attacks on the President are uncalled for, and I think counter productive.
So I think my ray of hope is the fact that over 400 bishops have kept silent, maybe on the principle that if they get enough rope they will hang themselves :)?
I am also somewhat comforted by the fact that the Vatican is keeping silence. I think Europe has a far different way of looking at politicians than we do, and are better able to differentiate between the office and the person.
Kind of interesting that today our priest gave sermon that included the statement that when we come before God we will be judged on how well we have obey the Church's teachings. I guess he assumes that they are the same as Christ's, but I certainly understand why many Protestants claim that Catholics are not true Christians, but rather Papists. Given that kind of statement I don't think I could argue with them.
On that note, I will go looking on the web for new casters for my office chair since one broke this evening and my perch is not precarious.
Hugs,
Mike L
Mike, I am going to keep on abortion. I know the bishops policy on no one being honored by a Catholic institution should openly support abortion. But some questions: Could the following be 'honored' by a Catholic institution?
ReplyDeleteAn atheist who discoved cure for cancer.
An American official who advocates torture.
A bishop who reasigned sexual molesters.
A 'scientist' who says global warming is just a myth.
A strong supporter of the death penalty.
A 'scientist' who says the world is only 5,000 years old.
A stem cell researcher.
A person who believes labor unions should be illegal.
A preacher who claims the RC church is the anti-christ.
A convict convicted of obstructing justice.
A psychiatrist who approves the practice of masturbation.
In sum then, there are no objections to anything counter to Catholic doctrine than abortion.So does the church have only one required belief? Are all brutal dictators eligible to speak as long as they oppose abortion?
I can deny everything statement of the Apostles Creed and still be honored.
Mike, silence is proof of moderation. Is that yourposition in defense of the other bishops?:) Jack
Jack
ReplyDeleteIf I may offer a different idea.
There is an old French comment of someone saying to the crowd “I am your leader, which way are you going so I can get in front.”
At the risk of shameless self-promotionclick here for a history of the response of the Church to the abortion movement. You may not like the perspective but story is solid.
There is much anger among pro-life Catholics about the very nominal stance on abortion that many Bishops and Catholic institutions have taken for the last several decades. The Notre Dame incident is providing a focus for this anger. The Bishops know pro-life Catholics provide a disproportionate amount of the person power and donations at the grass roots level.
Among the Bishop’s more than the usual bunch have stood up on the issue. About a quarter million signatures are on a petition to Notre Dame. Reportedly the Diocesan in box’s are overflowing to the point that that they are having trouble sorting out the normal mail. Some of the quieter pro-life Bishops feel they have the support to take a stronger position. But I think a lot of the fence-sitting Bishop’s have seen which way the crowd is going and are getting in front, or at least out of the way.
But a powergrab? They don’t have the cohesion agree on one let alone do it.
Hank,
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure I follow your comment.
But let me change the approach. What is the ultimate goal of the Church's anti-abortion position? Maybe you could spell out in a few steps where the pro-life people are headed in a legal sense.
I still make a difference between an acorn and an oak tree. I have never gotten an answer on that---only dismissive ridicule because the pro-life people can't find an answer. But forget that for the moment. Concentrate on the legal goal of the pro-liife gang. Jack
Jack, I certainly have to agree with you that abortion has become not only the number one public issue in the Church, but almost the only issue. But let me assure you, Sunday after Sunday I hear a long list of sins that will send me to hell, and when I think back about it, our priest has never mentioned abortion, he leaves those talks to the deacons. Hadn't thought about that until just now, wonder why.
ReplyDeleteI don't think that you will find a bishop in the US that supports abortion, after all it is the teaching of the Church that abortion is wrong, and seems to have been since the beginning. The only change I can see is that the Church has labeled abortion as murder in all stages of pregnancy, not just later stages. In practice a small change.
I also believe that the large majority of Catholics are uncomfortable with abortion on demand, and a fair percentage is more than uncomfortable, as Hank said, they are angry about it. I think you have claimed that the percentage that falls into this class is around 10%, a significant number in terms of political force.
Now my time sense is generally screwed up, but it still seems to me that while abortion has been a major issue since Roe VS Wade, it became dominate after the sexual abuse crisis in the American Church. I think that the bishops needed some issue to help restore their moral honor, and the abortion parade was just waiting for them to jump in front and be the leaders.
I do not believe in single issue positions in politics, it allows to many other things to slip past the voter while they are concentrating on the single issue. I do not think that their cause is being furthered by their methods, I think other approaches might be more successful. And in the end while I think abortion is sinful, I am not convinced that it should also be criminal.
Mike L
Mike,
ReplyDeleteAs you may know, I am opposed to "abortion on demand." I know of no one who suppors that extreme. But I do not believe the Church's position that one cell is a person. I believe that position is clearly anti-intuitive and irrational. Certainly the "faithful" show by there attitude toward abortion, that they do not accept one cell as a human being.
Possibly, you have heard me rant on spontaneous abortions. Up to 75 per cent of those persons, people, children, etc die before birth. What is the Catholic position on these abortions. Should we not attempt to prevent these abortions?
What is the religious 'fate' of these millions(billions) of lost lives? The only answer I have ever gotten is "we all die." Um??
I know the Church has always, with some variations as to details,opposed abortion. However, I believe they have opposed sexual intercourse as an end in it tself even more consistantly. Of course, consistancy is a poor "proof."
As you know, I believe the anti-abortion situation with the church is simply an offsring of the anti-sex position of the Church.
As I asked Frank (above) what are the practicalities in the anti- abortion movement. Where does it lead.
And, of course, the Church's position that women who get abortions are not to be legally punished indicates to me rank hypocrisy.
Is a women who exercises too much while pregnant, guilty, in the eyes of the Church of manslaughter if she miscaries? Involuntary manslaughter, of course.
It seems as if the Church's position is that only one of the Ten Commandments is binding; all the rest are up to individual interpretation as far as practice goes.:) Jack