The bishops, archbishops and cardinals of the American Catholic Church must stop their intense intrusive interference in the 2008 American Presidential election. As citizens, they are entitled to their opinions; but, as churchmen, they are abusing their power. To advocate that Catholics vote for a candidate or party solely on the basis of one issue, abortion, is not only irresponsible, but reflective of their ignorance about so many other crucial issues of life in America and the world.
As a a Catholic layman and graduate of a major Catholic university (in the Midwest), Catholic high school (in coastal southern California) and Catholic grammar school (north New Jersey coast), I resent their Vatican-led charge back into 19th Century mentality. Frankly, I believe their current involvement in politics is a deliberate distraction, an attempt to reassert the influence they lost as a result of the Catholic priests' sexual abuse scandal. It seems particularly odd that these "men" are so concerned about abortion when they allowed and participated in the extraordinarily widespread sexual abuse of children by priests in Catholic dioceses throughout the United States. Many in the hierarchy are criminals who have not faced trial.....and, probably, never will! .....and, yet, we laymen are expected to behave like their "sheep" and follow their pronouncements on matters of theology......and, apparently, politics.
I have known and benefited from many fine, dedicated Catholic priests, brothers and nuns in my life: Jesuits, Holy Cross Fathers, Brothers of St. Patrick and Sisters of St. Joseph of Chestnut Hill and others. But, the Catholic hierarchy, to me, are pontificating, self-serving hypocrites, who a college classmate of mine, a life long journalist from New England, once characterized as "not very Christ-like !".
As a Catholic husband and father, I have resolved that the hierarchy are irrelvant to my life until they are purged and punished for their misdeeds to the Catholic children and women of America. I don't expect that to occur in my lifetime, if ever. As a citizen of the United States of America, I will ignore the political pronouncements of these corrupt "men", follow my own conscience, and vote for the only Presidential candidate who honorably and truely reflects the virtues of faith, hope and charity proclaimed by the Catholic Church, Senator Barack Obama!
Please consider the following about the Catholic vote. My thanks to the author and the Los Angeles Times.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-rutten29-2008oct29,0,6174226.column
Nothing New…..just Pay, Pray and Obey!
10 years ago
1 comment:
Well, voting’s over but I spent some time writing this before the election so I have to submit it. At any rate, it’s only 24 months until the next election and most certainly the role of `religious conservatism’ will be one of the key issues to be dealt with in the rebuilding of the Republican Party. But we can rest easy, I guess, with regard to the independence of Catholic voters in this past election since the results suggest that they didn’t seem to be bringing priests in the voting booth with them.
So, here goes my usual ramble. Boy could I use an editor.
I tend to agree with you about the Catholic hierarchy telling their members how to vote. But it brings up a lot of issues. And, you know I can’t let `liberals’ off the hook here. As I said in another comment, the attempt to purge all religious expression from all aspects of public life by leftists, via judicial decisions and legislation has had a backlash. That’s why you have the `religious right’. So we have secular extremism and religious extremism with only two possibilities: that an unwanted embryo is either a lump of tissue no different than a tumor to be removed from a woman’s body (depending of course on whether the pregnancy is wanted or unwanted); or it is a human life with the same rights and privileges as an adult human. There is no room for compromise, no recognition of the changing quality of human life as it develops; and no willingness to separate morality from legality. Believe as I do, or I will sue you or pass a law to control you. Vote with me or you will go to Hell.
I am thankful for my Roman Catholic religious upbringing. I don’t believe that people are basically good (one of the foundations of today’s political liberal thought, I believe). Religion and family are the institutions that teach us moral values and maintain the continuity of values throughout generations. I have believed for a long time that a religious population and a secular government is the best and only hope for America. Religious people of moderation are more inclined to accept the imperfections of life and thus less inclined to look for `perfection’ via governmental solutions to things that governments cannot solve. I believe that the values I have as an adult are a direct result of my religious education and the religious practices of my parents.
As I left childhood I realized, like many, that rational human beings could not be the creation of an irrational God (in whose image we are created). Catholics will vote according to their consciences, as you suggest, which are the product of different combinations of faith and reason for each individual. In a sense all Catholics are `cafeteria’ Catholics’ whether `conservative’ or `liberal’.
Some years ago when the priest molestations were in the headlines, there was talk of a split with the Vatican and the need for an American Catholic Church, one which might be more compatible with contemporary American social thought and behavior. This would reduce the tensions, in effect, by adapting religious standards to changing behavior.
I think about the idea of standards. Should we set them high, knowing that they are good and right, but that we may fall short of them? Or do we lower standards so that we may feel more comfortable with ourselves, or out of compassion for others who are unable to reach them. (This is the sort of fuzzy-brain `equality’ notion of much of the `educated’ political left , i.e. if everyone can’t meet the standards, lower them).
And then there are personal standards and societal standards. The idea of same-sex marriage is based on tossing out thousands of years old societal standard for the contemporary satisfaction of, or out of compassion for, a small minority of individuals. Is that right? Or should we try to find a way to reduce discrimination based on sexual orientation without making marriage meaningless?
In terms of the specific problem of the Catholic church. Clearly the attitudes of the institutional Roman Catholic Church toward sex, which are so at odds with the experience of being fully human, have nurtured a priesthood of sexually immature (at best) and abnormal (at worst) men. And the idea that all sex outside of marriage is of equal sinfulness has made it too easy to consider pedophilia in the same context (morally and legally) as other forms of sex between consenting adults (or even post-pubertal but non-adult individuals).Thus we can’t be too surprised at the way the Catholic hierarchy has seemed to take this matter less repentantly than we would like
I believe that until we have both female priests and married priests of both genders the `hierarchy’ will be increasingly ineffective in the public dialogue on issues of `social morality’ (for lack of a better term). How’s that for a very UN-conservative view from an Irvine old fart.
Post a Comment