NYTimes 'Takes Issue' With Santorum's Catholic Faith, Which Is Not Open to the 'Modern Era'
Sheryl Gay Stolberg and religion reporter Laurie Goodstein profiled GOP candidate Rick Santorum for the front of Sunday's New York Times and seemed uncomfortable with the candidate's brand of strong Catholicism: "From 'Nominal Catholic' to Clarion of Faith – In Santorum's Religious Journey, Wife and Family Were Key."
The Times described how Santorum's dinner-table discussion with his future father-in-law led him on his path of strong anti-abortion and Catholic convictions.
For Mr. Santorum, a Republican candidate for president, that conversation was an early step on a path into a deeply conservative Catholic culture that has profoundly influenced his life as a husband, father and politician. Over the past two decades, he has undergone a religious transformation that is now spurring a national conversation about faith in the public sphere.
On the campaign trail, he has attacked President Obama for “phony theology,” warned of the “dangers of contraceptives” and rejected John F. Kennedy’s call for strict separation of church and state. His bold expressions of faith could affect his support in this week’s Super Tuesday nominating contests, possibly helping with conservative Christians, especially in the South, but scaring off voters uncomfortable mixing so much religion in politics.
Central to Mr. Santorum’s spiritual life is his wife, whom he calls “the rock which I stand upon.” Before marrying, the couple decided to recommit themselves to their Catholic faith -- a turnabout for Karen Santorum, who had been romantically involved with a well-known abortion provider in Pittsburgh and had openly supported abortion rights, according to several people who knew her then.
The Times could not even discuss the tragic loss of Santorum's son without wedging in its preferred liberal labeling of partial-birth abortion.
The loss of the Santorums’ son Gabriel, in 1996 -- just as the senator was leading the fight in Congress to ban the procedure that opponents call partial-birth abortion -- was devastating for the couple. Mrs. Santorum was nearly 20 weeks pregnant; doctors discovered a fetal anomaly. After a risky operation, she developed an infection and took antibiotics, which the couple knew would result in the birth of a baby who would not survive.
Critics likened it to an abortion, but in a 1997 interview with The Philadelphia Inquirer, Mr. Santorum said that was not the case. Mr. Schoeneman, the couple’s friend, said the death convinced them that “God had a purpose in Gabriel’s life, and they were going to live out that purpose in their lives.” Both Santorums began speaking out more strongly against abortion; Mrs. Santorum became prominent in her own right after publishing a 1998 book, “Letters to Gabriel.”
This portion was particularly dense with slant:
Many Catholics take issue with Mr. Santorum’s approach to their faith. Mr. Santorum, polls show, has lost the Catholic vote in every primary contest so far, some by wide margins.
Garry Wills, a cultural historian and professor emeritus at Northwestern University, is among many Catholics whose touchstone is the Second Vatican Council from 1962-65, which opened up Catholicism to the modern era and proclaimed that the church is its people, not just the pope and his bishops.
“Santorum is not a Catholic, but a papist,” Mr. Wills said in an e-mail.
Mr. Santorum’s defenders say there is nothing troubling about his approach to faith and politics. “What he is saying is something very simple: I should not shed my moral beliefs when I walk in the Oval Office,” said Mr. DeWine, who is also Catholic.
The blunt statement that Santorum "has lost the Catholic vote in every primary contest so far" is far from obvious, as the Times' own David Leonhardt explained last week. As for "Many Catholics," the Times means "Many Catholic Democrats."
Regarding Garry Wills' "papist" crack, my MRC colleague Tim Graham reminded me that Wills has been trashing the Catholic Church hierarchy in books as far back as 1972.
- Clay Waters's blog
- Login to post comments















Comments
And burying women up to their chests and...
Submitted by Annie Ashe Fields on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 8:39am.
...STONING them to DEATH IS???????
Because THAT'S the peaceful religion of Islam.
Oh... and I don't recall a mob of Catholics PUTTING A BULLET IN THE BACK OF THE HEAD of anyone OR BLOWING THEM UP... just because someone WROTE A NOTE in the BIBLE.
Frickin' morons.
And that's
Submitted by misterbee241 on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 11:02am.
when the woman is found guilty of rape. Her rape.
So let me see if I understand this.
Submitted by DumbCanuck on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 8:53am.
Someone who lives the Catholic faith, according to Catholic teachings, who incorporates that faith into every aspect of their lives... is NOT a Catholic, right? Did I get that right? Is that what this academic Garry Wills said?
Not only did he say Mr. Santorum is NOT a Catholic for following the tenents of his faith so forcefully, he even makes up his own pejorative to describe what he thinks Mr. Santorum really is -- a "Papist".
Really now... Is it just me, or is the room spinning?
For the record, it is my understanding that many in the Catholic Church -- clergy and laity both -- are realizing now that Vatican II was a huge mistake, and the Church continues to pay for that gross error in judgement to this very day.
"There... Are... Four... Lights!"
You're going to have to
Submitted by motherbelt on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 9:02am.
You're going to have to provide some evidence for your "understanding."
While there may be some who are of the opinion that Vatican II was a mistake, that's a long way from it being "realized" and a fact.
Vatican was not a mistake
Submitted by WingletDriver on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 10:42am.
And no pope or bishop has said that. The anarchy after Vatican II was orchestrated by a lot of dissident priests and bishops in "the spirit of Vatican II." In the name of reform we got clown masses, liturgical dancers, liberation theology, rotten translations, horrible music, etc. But over the last 2 or so decades the buzz phrase has been "Reform the reform," and it takes time.
As a comparison, it's kind of like what has happened in the US under the guise of being a kinder, gentler, better nation. The libs have taken all of our heritage and attempted to destroy it. The Tea Party, Patriot Post, Newsbusters, et al. are not trying to take us back to the 1950's, but to reform the deformed notion libs have in the US.
I hope your reply is to
Submitted by motherbelt on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 11:03am.
I hope your reply is to DumbCanuck, because I was challenging his assertion.
Yeah, sorry
Submitted by WingletDriver on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 11:13am.
Bad etiquette on my part.
Perfect. Nicely done Wing.
Submitted by Soldat44 on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 11:32am.
Perfect. Nicely done Wing.
⇒ Ignorant Canuck
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 11:07am.
"Papist" is a newly-coined pejorative? Really?
Newly coined . . .
Submitted by WingletDriver on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 11:14am.
in the 15th century
Thanks for the reminder....I
Submitted by motherbelt on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 8:57am.
Thanks for the reminder....I knew I had something about Garry Wills in the back of my head that made me suspicious of anything he had to say about the RCC...
Now it makes sense that a liberal would turn to him for support in bashing Santorum.
What a disgusting article on many levels
Submitted by Radical1979 on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 9:41am.
Implying that the Santorum's aborted their baby is horrific. And the death of a child impacts every parent, forever. Of course seeing and holding their dead baby would strengthen their knowledge that a baby in the womb is a baby and not a glob of misc cells.
Lastly, looking into who Santorum's wife dated before they were married? Classless.
They don't need no stinking facts!!
Submitted by motherbelt on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 11:15am.
Disgusting on many levels, indeed.
But this is the level of class that we have to expect on their side.
After a risky operation, she developed an infection and took antibiotics, which the couple knew would result in the birth of a baby who would not survive.
Certain antibiotics MAY cause birth defects, but they have no way of knowing what Karen Santorum was prescribed.
And here is ZERO evidence that taking antibiotics during pregnancy will result in a baby who would not survive, or that they will kill a baby in the womb.
I too, took antibiotics when I was pregnant with my daughter. My infection was causing premature labor at 26 weeks, and the alternative was to allow her to be born at that stage and maybe not survive. I was fortunate; the infection was cured, labor stopped and I carried her to term.
The Santorums were not so lucky. To hold that against them is just deplorable.
These folks need to study the Catholic principle of "double effect" before they presume to cast judgment.
Gary Wills does not speak for
Submitted by Soldat44 on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 11:33am.
Gary Wills does not speak for the truly faithful. He speaks for the Obama catholics(little 'c').
Well now we have the NYT,
Submitted by celator on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 11:41am.
Well now we have the NYT, leaker of classified documents, employer of plagiarists, losing its financial shirt for years, declaring who is a "real" Catholic and who is not. With this heavy task in hand, we can expect the NYT religion editor to soon decide for NYT readers who is a real Baptist and who is not, who is a real Evangelical and who is not, who is a real Lutheran and who is not, who is a real Methodist and who is not.
Message to Csrdinal Dolan, mighty warrior of religious freedom, if you have the time, could you stroll over to the NYT editorial offices and ram your size 12 combat boot in just the right spot of the Grey Lady. Figuratively, of course. Do it before the NYT decides you are not a real Catholic.