Doctrine and Dissent
Making your voice heard
Can. 211 All the Christian faithful have the duty and right to work so that the divine message of salvation more and more reaches all people in every age and in every land.
Can. 212 §3. According to the knowledge, competence, and prestige which they possess, they have the right and even at times the duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church and to make their opinion known to the rest of the Christian faithful, without prejudice to the integrity of faith and morals, with reverence toward their pastors, and attentive to common advantage and the dignity of persons. [Code of Canon Law]
[Via Hermeneutic of Continuity]
Bishop speaks the truth in love to NADLGM conference
Coadjutor Bishop Jaime Soto, who will become the ordinary of Sacramento, California, at the end of November, was invited to speak to the conference of the National Association of Diocesan Lesbian and Gay Ministries. These are people who work directly for bishops.
Bishop Soto simply repeated the Church’s teachings.
“Sexual relations between people of the same sex can be alluring for homosexuals, but it deviates from the true meaning of the act and distracts them from the true nature of love to which God has called us all,” Bishop Soto said. “For this reason, it is sinful. Married love is a beautiful, heroic expression of faithful, life-giving, life-creating love. It should not be accommodated and manipulated for those who would believe that they can and have a right to mimic its unique expression.”
At least five audience members walked out during his remarks and afterward he endured a group of audience members who berated him for what he said. A board member of the organization was overheard telling one of the tables in the room: “On behalf of the board, I apologize. We had no idea Bishop Soto was going to say what he said.”
Catholic congressmen respond to Pelosi
Last week, a group of Catholic congressmen from the House of Representatives sent a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, taking her to task for misrepresenting Catholic teaching on abortion in a TV interview. Here is their letter.
Dear Speaker Pelosi,
On the Sunday, August 24th, broadcast of NBC’s Meet the Press, you stated “as an ardent, practicing Catholic, [abortion] is an issue that I have studied for a long time.” As fellow Catholics and legislators, we wish you would have made a more honest effort to lay out the authentic position of the Church on this core moral issue before attempting to address it with authority.
Your subsequent remarks mangle Catholic Church doctrine regarding the inherent sanctity and dignity of human life; therefore, we are compelled to refute your error.
In the interview, Tom Brokaw reminded you that the Church professes the sanctity of human life from conception to natural death. As stated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church: “Since it must be treated from conception as a person, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being” (2274).
To this, you responded, “I understand. And this is like maybe 50 years or something like that. So again, over the history of the Church, this is an issue of controversy.” Unfortunately, your statement demonstrates a lack of understanding of Catholic teaching and belief regarding abortion.
From the Apostles of the first century to Pope John Paul the Great “the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law” (Catechism 2271).
Thus, your erroneous claim about the history of the Church’s opposition to abortion is false and denigrates our common Faith. For example, during the reign of Pope Innocent XI in 1679, the Church unequivocally stated it is an error for Catholics to believe fetuses do not have a soul; and confirmed the teaching that abortion constitutes an unjustified taking of innocent human life.
To reduce the scandal and consternation caused amongst the faithful by your remarks, we necessarily write you to correct the public record and affirm the Church’s actual and historical teaching that defends the sanctity of human life. We hope that you will rectify your errant claims and apologize for misrepresenting the Church’s doctrine and misleading fellow Catholics.
The signatories are:
- Thaddeus McCotter of Michigan
- Steve Chabot of Ohio
- Virginia Fox of North Carolina
- Phil Gingrey of Georgia
- Peter King of New York
- Steve King Iowa
- Daniel Lungren of California
- Devin Nunes of California
- John Sullivan of Oklahoma
- John Boehner of Ohio
- Phil English of Pennsylvania
- Jean Schmidt of Ohio
- Jim Walsh of New YOrk
- Jeff Fortenberry of Nebraska
- Michael McCaul of Texas
- Paul Ryan of Wisconsin
- Walter Jones of North Carolina
- Mike Ferguson of New Jersey
I’m glad, but not surprised, to see the name of my friend Jeff Fortenberry there. I’m saddened that not one of the Catholic congressmen from my own state are among them.
Photo credit: Screen capture of NBC’s Meet the Press.
Catholics Against Joe Biden
Hot of the web presses, so to speak, we find Catholics Against Joe Biden, a new blog by Stephen Dillard, Chris Blosser, and Jay Anderson. Following on the successful Catholics against Rudy (Guiliani) blog, this is a non-partisan effort to point out reasons why Catholics should not vote for Catholic politicians who openly and flagrantly cause scandal because of their dissent from non-negotiable Church teachings that intersect with public policy. In most cases, but not all, this means abortion.
Now that Biden is the vice-presidential nominee for the Democratic Party, it is time for faithful Catholics to stand up and say that we will not be pandered to, that the act of choosing someone who may sit in a pew in a Catholic church on Sunday, regardless of his public beliefs and actions, should convince us to vote for him. Likewise, I would fully expect that if John McCain chose a dissenting Catholic for his VP spot, they would get the same treatment. Neither does it mean that a non-Catholic with the same beliefs would be more palatable.
But when it’s a fellow Catholic and we’re being told that this makes it okay, then we need to stand up and say it is not. I encourage you to bookmark the site, save the RSS feed in your feed reader, link to it, and put a banner on your site, if you have one.
Biden: pro-abortion Catholic running mate
I don’t understand why reporters are so clueless about Barack Obama’s selection of Sen. Joe Biden as his vice-presidential running mate, vis a vis Biden’s attraction to Catholic voters because himself is Catholic. Did they learn nothing from 2004 and John Kerry?
Steven Waldman, the editor-in-chief of Beliefnet, writes on The Huffington Post that Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware, a pro-choice Catholic, is a smart pick by Barack Obama in terms of religious politics.
Obama, he writes, “desperately needs to retain his lead among Catholics,” many of whom are still upset at John McCain for his fleeting embrace of John Hagee, the Catholic-bashing televangelist from San Antonio.
I doubt Hagee’s anti-Catholicism will outweigh Biden’s pro-abortion stance. For those whose self-identification as Catholic affects the way they vote, which is the group they’re so hot to capture, the selection of a reliable pro-abort—which Biden is, even if he’s not as rabidly bloodthirsty as Obama—is still not going to endear him to Catholics. While Waldman writes that the selection could backfire because it will keep the question of whether pro-abortion Catholic politicians should receive Communion front and center throughout the campaign, he seems to want to ignore the problem, as if wishing it away will work.
In other words, he’s Catholic enough to appeal to Catholics, pro-life enough to avoid some Church attacks, and pro-choice enough to satisfy Hillary voters.
That’s a load of malarkey that only someone who is being willfully blind could believe. What we will see is that instead of being palatable to all, he will be palatable to none. If he’s pro-choice enough to satisfy the Moloch-bloc of the Democratic Party, then there’s no way he can be described as pro-life.
And speaking of the Communion controversy, Ed Peters weighs in early with his take on Biden in relation to the canon laws on reception of Communion. Specifically, he approaches the question of whether the strictures of canons 915 and 916 apply to Biden.
In regard to the Catholic Joseph Biden’s eligibility to receive holy Communion, then, the right questions will seek to answer whether certain of his public actions (chiefly legislative actions and public advocacy efforts) constitute obstinate perseverance in manifest grave sin. Answering those questions well will require (1) accurate assemblage of the facts (an area for which expert lay Catholic observers of American politics should be consulted), and (2) accurate inquiry into the requirements of Church law and moral teaching (an area for which bishops are chiefly responsible).
I have little hope that the secular media will engage in due diligence in this area and we’ll be subject to the same nonsensical reporting on the Catholic faith’s relation to politics that we saw in 2004. Still, it’s up to Catholics of all kinds to keep approaching this subject rationally and in good faith and not let politics be the only concern here. For at least Biden, but also for those who might support him, the questions have an eternal consequence.
Photo: Official US Congress photo in the public domain.
Which one is God?
Obama on his prayer life, from a 2004 interview with the Chicago Sun-Times:
“It’s not formal, me getting on my knees,” he says. “I think I have an ongoing conversation with God…. I’m constantly asking myself questions about what I’m doing, why I am doing it.”
So, what he’s saying is that he is good.
Then there’s his definition of Christianity:
“I am a Christian … So, I have a deep faith,” Obama continues. “I’m rooted in the Christian tradition. I believe that there are many paths to the same place, and that is a belief that there is a higher power, a belief that we are connected as a people.
“That there are values that transcend race or culture, that move us forward, and there’s an obligation for all of us individually as well as collectively to take responsibility to make those values lived.”
How does any of that make him Christian? The same could be said by any adherent of a dozen different religions. Karen Hall says, “Actually, I agree with everything after the last comma. Obama and I just have extremely different interpretations of what that means.”
As for being “rooted in the Christian tradition”, so was Pelagianism, Arianism, Nestorianism, and so on.
In the end, I’d have more respect for Obama and all the other politicians who wear their Christianity like a cloak on the campaign trail if they would just come out and say they don’t believe or that they’re agnostic or that they don’t care much one way or the other. I wouldn’t be more likely to vote for them, but it would increase my respect an iota.
[Link via WND via Karen Hall]
Photo credit: Ray Noland via Is Barack Obama the Messiah?
Religious faith in America fading over the past generation
While the Catholic Church is losing members slower than Protestant churches, that’s only because so many immigrants are themselves Catholic already. That’s one of the conclusions of the “U.S. Religious Landscape Survey,” from the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, as reported in the New York Times.
What’s sad is that self-identified former Catholics make up one of the largest religious groups in the US.
According to their research, over the past generation, 44 percent of Americans have switched religious affiliations, either to another religion or denomination or to nothing at all. Of Catholics it says:
To no one’s surprise, “unaffiliated” was the biggest gainer. That the United States is becoming ever more secular and/or hostile to religious faith is fairly evident to anyone living in or near a big city or on the coasts. But it’s a spreading phenomenon.
Of course, the surveyors see it in the context of politics and similar matters. Plus, I’m not sure whether they even understand the categories they’re studying.
The rise of the unaffiliated does not mean that Americans are becoming less religious, however. Contrary to assumptions that most of the unaffiliated are atheists or agnostics, most described their religion “as nothing in particular.”
Which is, you know, what agnostic means. According to the New Oxford American Dictionary, whose definition is as good as any, it means: “A person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.” That’s pretty much someone who believes in “nothing in particular.”
They also claim that people are abandoning large, impersonal churches for more personal, intimate venues. Supposedly, mega-churches succeed not because they are large but because “they have smaller ministries inside.” Or because they offer an experience that is not hostile to the experience that many people seek, which is a religion that doesn’t require too much counter-cultural changing of their lives.
Catholics coming in the front door and out the back
The Vatican’s awesome new reference web site
Check out this cool new web site from the Vatican’s Congregation for the Clergy: Biblia Clerus. It looks to be an awesome resource for all Catholics.
There’s a searchable Biblical text with commentary from the early Church fathers, the Sunday lectionary readings cross-referenced to the homilies of the Church fathers, the principal texts of the Magisterium of the Church and Popes, and current and earlier versions of the Eastern and Latin Codes of Canon Law with commentary. Oh, and did I mention that you can download it all to your computer (if you’re running Windows, drat, but I do have the software to run Windows on my Mac).
And then it links to the rest of their web site at clerus.org with all kinds of other information, including their official mailing list for the Congregation’s documents.
Very cool!
Chicago archdiocese speaks out on Pfleger
The Archdiocese of Chicago has responded to the outrageous comments by Fr. Michael Plfeger in which he said a gun shop owner and some legislators should be “snuffed”. Now, we all know that the jargon of the street says that “snuffed” means killed, but the context of how he used is clear that he meant something like “removed from public influence” or “had their livelihood stripped away.” That doesn’t mitigate the senselessness and irresponsibility of the words, especially since they could be misconstrued by an unbalanced individual, nor does it mitigate Plfeger’s consorting with hatemongers and racists like Jesse Jackson and Louis Farrakhan.
In any case here is the archdiocese’s relatively mild statement:
On Saturday, May 26, 2007, during an anti-gun rally at a Riverdale gun shop, Fr. Michael Pfleger, pastor of St. Sabina parish, reportedly made aggressive and inappropriate statements threatening the store’s owner.
If the comments reported are accurate, and a threat was made, it is up to the civil authorities to investigate the matter and determine what if any action should be taken against Fr. Pfleger.
Francis Cardinal George, O.M.I., Archbishop of Chicago, stated, “publicly delivering a threat against anyone’s life betrays the civil order and is morally outrageous, especially if this threat came from a priest. It is first of all up to the civil authorities to determine what threat might have been contained in the remarks attributed to Fr. Michael Pfleger. With that determination, the sponsors of the anti-gun rally and the Archdiocese can better decide how to respond.”
I’m not sure why the archdiocese needs to wait for the civil authorities to investigate before it can take action. Pfleger is a Catholic priest. His words are clearly documented. His previous heterodox and syncretist and publicly disobedient actions give clear cause for the cardinal to act. But as someone pointed out in an email to me, given the state the Church in Chicago is in—with the amount of heterodoxy among the clergy—that any kind of public statement from the archdiocese that is willing to acknowledge that a priest has crossed the line is a big step.
Technorati Tags: Catholic | Chicago | bishop | priest | Pfleger |
Dignity’s true colors
If anyone was still under the misapprehension that Dignity, the homosexual-activist Catholic group, was in fact Catholic, the fact that they have a pretend-ordained woman set to preside over their Gay Pride “Mass” should dispel that notion.
Dignity/NY, the LGBT Catholic group, will have a woman preside over its Gay Pride Mass for the first time on June 23 at 7:30 p.m. at the Judson Memorial Church on Washington Square South. She is the Reverend Victoria Rue, a Roman Catholic womanpriest who was ordained by three Roman Catholic womenbishops in 2005.
Here’s hoping that the “menbishops” of the Church in the US once and for all order all of their diocesan ministries to homosexuals to sever all ties with Dignity, because it is a heretical group.
Technorati Tags: Catholic | Dignity | homosexuality | heterodox | dissent | women's ordination |
The real face of VOTF
A reader sent me a copy of the ballot for Voice of the Faithful’s elections for the national representative council from their Region XI, which includes California, Hawaii, and Nevada.
There are three candidates. The first is Jim Jenkins of Berkeley, California, the current officeholder. Jim says that his agenda includes “Church governance where all the people of God participate fully and have the determinative voice” and “Promotion of national (and international) convocation(s) - sometimes called ‘lay synods’ - to chart the pastoral direction of the church in North America.” Note to Jim: The Church is not a democracy. I’d rather the Catholic Church in America not end up in the same splintering mess that the Episcopal Church has because we know exactly what kind of changes the people who advocate such “lay synods” and lay governance are looking for.
The next candidate is James P. Keating. James has an impressive resume including a “Catholic Father of the Year” award. Oh, and he “perform(s) civil marriages (as allowed for by the State of California) [but not the Catholic Church] for those that can’t, or don’t want to get married in the church.” You’d think that might be a disqualification for a Catholic position, but James assures us that “My good friend, Bishop Frank Quinn, says this is a growing number!”
James is also an honorary member of NOVA, an association of married priests and, he so helpfully tells us, “kissed the Blarney stone.” Indeed.
Our final candidate is perhaps the most impressive. He is a Hugh ORegan, “a former Roman Catholic priest (Benedictine)” who is also an active member of Most Holy Redeemer Parish in San Francisco. Click the link to see why that is significant, if you don’t recall.
And that’s Voice of the Faithful in a nutshell. They claim to be “centrist”, if such a thing is even possible for a Catholic, but every prominent player in the organization seems to come from the heterodox side of the balance sheet.
Technorati Tags: Catholic | Voice of the Faithful |
Aussie pol says hell preferable to changing vote
After Cardinal George Pell warned Australian Catholic lawmakers that they risked eternal consequences if they voted to approve embryonic stem-cell research and funding, at least one told the cardinal he would rather go to Hell than change his vote. That was Tony Stewart, evidently not the NASCAR driver, but a parliamentary backbencher in the New South Wales parliament.
Maybe I’ll go to Hell, but if I go to Hell I’m going to do so by saving a lot of lives, [except the lives of the unborn children killed and dismembered for their cells] because that’s what this bill is about,” said Tony Stewart. “We don’t need a religious leader telling members of parliament what should be done.”
After Pell warned Premier Morris Iemma that he may deny him Communioin, Iemma and the other Catholic pols erupted in anager and, predictably, accused him of mixing religion and politics. They must be getting their talking points from the US Democratic Party.
As for the bill itself, why I don’t see what the problem is:
The bill would permit “human-animal hybrids”, “fertilizing immature eggs from aborted girls with adult male sperm” to form new embryos, and “mixing the genetic material of more than two persons” and destroying them at 14 days for their stem-cells.
What could possibly go wrong with that? “Yes, you can make human-animal hybrids and chimeras and other children as long you make sure they’re dead within 14 days.” Apart from the murder of the children, note that they’re planning to implant these hybrid cells into human beings. Where are the moonbats who are usually protesting genetically modified feed-corn? This is worlds worse.
Technorati Tags: Catholic | Australia | stem cells | Pell |
Catholics Against Rudy
Update: If you want to see video Steve’s appearance on MSNBC’s “Hardball with Chris Mathews” there are two links: 1 and 2.
Stephen Dillard of the sadly now defunct blog Southern Appeal is one of the names behind a new site called Catholics Against Rudy. Their aim is to oppose Rudy Giuliani’s bid for Republican presidential nomination because of his appalling record on issues related to the Cultures of Life and Death.
While there are other candidates with equally bad records, as a Catholic, Giuliani is of particular concern to us, even if essentially he has publicly repudiated his faith. As Catholics, it’s our duty to police our own house.
If some Republicans thought that Catholic opposition to John Kerry was based on partisan politics they were wrong, and if they try to advance Giuliani’s nomination, they’ll see how wrong.
There are other candidates who are much more suitable, Republican and otherwise. Giuliani is not. Simple as that.
I hope Steve’s site becomes a strong resource for those seeking to advance candidates who support a culture of life. It’s scheduled to go live on July 4.
And if you have a blog or web site and want to show your agreement, put this graphic on your site and link to Catholics Against Rudy.
Technorati Tags: Catholic | Giuliani | blog |
Cardinal Pell’s mandate for Catholic school principals
How’s this for a bizarre headline: “Sydney principals forced to uphold Catholic values.” In other news, lawyers have been forced to uphold the law, doctors have been forced to treat disease, and baseball players have been forced to win games.
This is the headline on the transcript of a news report from the Australian ABC TV network. Here’s how the story begins:
TONY JONES: Back to Australia, and Catholic school principals in the Archdiocese of Sydney will soon have to swear on the Bible to uphold Catholic principles.
Cardinal George Pell is imposing the oaths to ensure senior teachers toe the church line on contentious issues like women’s ordination, birth control and homosexuality.
Philippa McDonald reports.
PHILIPPA MCDONALD: As Cardinal, George Pell is the chief teacher of the Catholic faith in Sydney, and now he says it’s not enough for those who run his schools to say they believe, they’ll have to swear two oaths as well.
The oaths are merely a Profession of Faith and the Oath of Fidelity. If you’re going to teach in a Catholic school, should you have any problem assuring the parents of these students that you will indeed provide the Catholic education they expect you’re giving. If my physician refused to take the Hippocratic Oath, but asked me to take his word that he would act ethically anyway, I’d be looking for a new doctor.
But these principals are calling the decision “heavy-handed” and complain that it came with no consultation. Why should there be consultation? They’re Catholic teachers in Catholic schools. Do we need to negotiate with them on how much of God’s revealed truth they should abide by?
I applaud Cardinal Pell for taking seriously his duty and obligation to safeguard the faith and the methods by which it is passed on.
Technorati Tags: Catholic | Sydney | Australia | schools | fidelity | dissent | doctrine | Pell |
God warns Giuliani
Lightning struck the building where the Republic presidential primary debate was being held last night and messed with the sound system, just as Rudy Giuliani was explaining whhy he dissents from Catholic belief on abortion. They all had a chuckle, the other candidates backing away and Giuliani making a joke.
“Look, for someone who went to parochial schools all his life, this is a very frightening thing that’s happening right now,” Giuliani chuckled.
For those who refuse to see, even a burning bush would not convince. I might have told the story before on the blog about the Unitarian-Universalist minister in my hometown of Canton, Mass., when I was a kid. I remember reading in the newspaper how the atheist minister (those wacky UUs!) laughed off the incident in which a lightning bolt struck his office, hit his bookshelf, burned through the books until it reached the Bible and burned through until reaching the page on which the verse about misleading shepherds and millstones. And he laughed about the coincidence. What else could he do?
Thomas has the video of the moment.
