Obama Catholics vs. Bozell
Tuesday's Washington Post carries a letter to the editor opposing Brent Bozell's Post letter to the editor on Saturday. The writer is Stephanie Niedringhaus, communications coordinator for Network, a "Catholic social justice advocacy organization."
Naturally, this leftist group opposes the lawsuits against the Obama administration as a baldly political move (as if their website displays a group that's more religious than political): "There is also no denying that many Catholics believe that the bishops’ religious freedom campaign and the timing of the recent lawsuits have more to do with politics than faith. Not everyone is on board." But these people were pretty much always on board with Obama.
This is how they showed up in the press when other liberal Catholics were upset with Obama. They sounded like Obama advisers in a February 11 New York Times story: "Meanwhile, Sister Simone Campbell, executive director of Network, a group founded by nuns decades ago to lobby on social justice issues, warned White House officials that nearly 500 Catholic activists would be in Washington this weekend for a conference, and that if no compromise had been reached by then, all of them would return to their parishes fired up about the contraception mandate."
Then they hailed the "accomodation" proposed by Team Obama -- force insurance companies to pay for free contraceptives without charging the Catholic churches -- as glorious "dialogue" and democracy in action. From NPR's Talk of the Nation on February 14:
NEAL CONAN: And let me ask you another question: Do you feel that the process by which this was worked out - a rule was proposed, people objected to it, the government changed its mind and adapted to it - that this was adequate, that this was responsive?
SIMONE CAMPBELL: Oh, it was definitely responsive. The White House certainly heard that they needed to make a change. They stood up and took notice. The key, I think, is that, yes, going forward, we continue the dialogue. This is a democracy. We raise these issues. We deal with them. We resolve them. We move on.
So Niedringhaus wrote in her Post letter that her group "praised the accommodation, and we support ongoing negotiations as details are worked out." But there are no "ongoing negotiations." The bishops have been told that Team Obama will not make any further compromises from its "accomodation." You can oppose the lawsuits, but you're arguing against the facts to claim there's still a "dialogue" with any political meaning at the moment.
CORRECTION: I originally wrote the Niedringhaus letter appeared on Monday -- because this post-holiday Tuesday feels like a Monday.
- Tim Graham's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
...a "Catholic social justice
Submitted by Dave. on Tue, 05/29/2012 - 6:59am.
...a "Catholic social justice advocacy organization."
That is as far as I read.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
The 'spirit of Vatican II' church is dying...
Submitted by ncstevem on Tue, 05/29/2012 - 7:31am.
and traditional Catholicism is slowly returning to the forefront.
The 1960's & '70's hippie priests, habitless social justice pagan nuns and quasi-Catholic bishops are retiring and dying out. They're being replaced by religious zealous for the true Catholic Faith who aren't ashamed to speak up for Truth.
The traditional Latin Mass is slowly returning to the every day usage in the Church. In 1988 there were less than 10 weekly Latin Masses celebrated in the US -- today it's over 400 and each of the last 4 years that number has been increasing by about 50 additional weekly Latin Masses. If the Pope finalizes the regularization of the Society of St. Pius X as is widely expected, there will be an additional 500 traditional Roman Catholic priests added to the growing numbers of diocesan priests who are returning to the traditions of the Faith.
No longer will the Ted Kennedy's, Joe Biden's, Kathleen Sebelius's, Nancy Pelosi's and Mario Cuomo's of this world be able to get away with flouting the Faith. Either you're Catholic in ALL aspects of the Faith or you're not. More and more priests and bishops are going to publicly confront these traitors to the Faith.
SIMONE CAMPBELL: Oh, it was
Submitted by motherbelt on Tue, 05/29/2012 - 8:09am.
SIMONE CAMPBELL: Oh, it was definitely responsive. The White House certainly heard that they needed to make a change. They stood up and took notice.
What a crock. These are the words of someone who wishes to believe that she has more influence than the bishops. And to inflate her own importance she sees accommodation where there is none.
Really?? Social Justice??!!
Submitted by c5then on Tue, 05/29/2012 - 8:57am.
That's just a way of denying our individual responsibility and mandate by placing the burden on "Society" and then claiming there is nothing else that can be done. There is no justice except for individual justice. Social justice is marxism that picks and chooses certain religious points to support it's ideology while ignoring and denying others that refute it.
Regardless of the slight of hand "accomodation" they need to ask themselves this question: By what authority does the Federal Government dictate that a private business must give away it's product or services to "customers" free of charge?
Beyond that, there is the ominous definition in the HHS rule that says that if a "religious" organization serves others outside it's own "kind" or hires those not of it's own "kind" then it is considered "not religious" by HHS. This is the heart of the Great Commision that is given by the Messiah himself to "go forth and make disciples of all men". How can a religious organization live the Gospels and spread the Good News to all non-believers, if by doing so it is considered non-religious? Once this ruse is allowed to stand, what other "rules" are going to be applied to the now re-defined "non-religious" institution?
This is not really an attack on religious freedom, it is an attack on religion. Because as a result of acquiesing to the governments new definition of what is a religious organization and what is not (something specifically prohibited from Congress by the Constitution), it grants the government the ability to independantly and soley decide which organizations are covered by the first amendment and which are not. This is the same as State sanctioned religions.
Madison and Jefferson and Franklin built a Republic - Roberts killed it!
Authority in the Catholic
Submitted by KC Mulville on Tue, 05/29/2012 - 9:30am.
Authority in the Catholic Church isn't based on the consent of the governed, unlike American civil society. Authority is based on the grace given to the Apostles by Jesus himself, and we believe that bishops are the successors to those Apostles, and that the grace given to the Apostles is bestowed on the successors.
Other denominations believe otherwise, and we're happy for them.
But this is a case where a nominally Catholic organization believes that their lack of consent ... somehow ... affects what counts as official Catholic teaching. No. The Catholic faith is what the bishops say it is.
And, we Catholics further believe, that when the bishops define the faith as being such-and-such (whatever the issue at hand), then Catholics have an obligation to adopt that teaching as their own. You might think that Catholics can sit back and criticize, or dissent, if they disagree with the leadership. But part of being Catholic is the effort (and yes, at times, struggle) to incorporate the teaching of the Church into one's own conscience. The exception is when an individual Catholic sees a bishop's teaching as being in contradiction with something already taught elsewhere; not that each Catholic gets to make up their own mind and then judge the bishops. The only real exception is when an individual believes that obeying Z would force him to disobey X, and that both X and Z came from the same church's teachings.
The SIMPLE fact is
Submitted by chiefpayne on Wed, 05/30/2012 - 1:53pm.
you are either a PRACTICING Catholic or you are NOT. If you ARE a practicing Catholic, you FOLLOW the teachings of the Church and follow it's tenants. If you are NOT a practicing Catholic, then you do whatever you want, and it is a moot point if you call yourself a good Catholic or not.
As such, IMO, if you do NOT wish to abide by the Church's tenants, then you have a choice to LEAVE the Church...or be called, RIGHTFULLY SO, a hypocrite!!