TheAgitator.com
Nonsense.
Thursday, April 17th, 2003The National Review/Weekly Standard crowd is crowing about a Sioux Falls Bishop’s request to Tom Daschle that, because he takes policy positions in direct opposition to the church (on abortion, for example), he can no longer call himself a Catholic.
The Standard’s Jodi Bottum:
This year, on January 16, Bishop Carlson received additional ammunition for his discussions with Daschle when Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger’s office, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, issued in Rome a “Doctrinal Note” on Catholics in political life. “A well-formed Christian conscience,” the note declared, “does not permit one to vote for a political program or an individual law which contradicts the fundamental contents of faith and morals.”
This is particularly laughable coming from the Weekly Standard. Should the Catholics at the Standard and National Review who cheerleaded — in fact who some say actually persuaded the president’s decision to go to war with Iraq — should they be required to purge themselves of Catholicism, too?
Or does the “your politics must mirror your religion” creed only apply to Democrats?
Very good point, Mr. Balko!
(I am not a Catholic, but this is a good argument…)
As a Lutheran rabbit, I hate defending the Roman Catholic church — but the Roman Catholic church’s doctrine wrt abortion is “ex cathedra” — literally, from the (pope’s) chair. The pope’s war ramblings? not so much ex cathedra.
As I’m sure you’re aware, the pontiff can go off all day long — but only his statements made ex cathedra are binding.
Here’s how the RC’s define this, uh, very interesting doctrine.
“We teach and define that it is a dogma Divinely revealed that the Roman pontiff when he speaks ex cathedra, that is when in discharge of the office of pastor and doctor of all Christians, by virtue of his supreme Apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine regarding faith or morals to be held by the universal Church, by the Divine assistance promised to him in Blessed Peter, is possessed of that infallibility with which the Divine Redeemer willed that his Church should be endowed in defining doctrine regarding faith or morals, and that therefore such definitions of the Roman pontiff are of themselves and not from the consent of the Church irreformable.”
Mr. Balko,
Your question is a legitimate one as far as it goes, but I think a legitimate answer is “No, they shouldn’t.” And that is because Mr. Dashley’s public stances put him in direct opposition to the definitive teachings of the Church which, after all, is a voluntary community based on assent to certain beliefs and teachings. The pro-war people should reflect deeply on what the Church teaches and what JPII has said, but the key questions in that area require prudential judgement on the part of the people involved. Succinctly, Church teaching is definitively that abortion is always wrong. But it does not teach that war is always wrong, just that the decision about war must meet strict standards - and much argumentation and soul-searching take place around whether each case meets those standards.
BTW, I agree with your stances about half the time, which is why I frequently check you out. If I never agreed with you, I would just write you off. If I always agreed with you, there would be nothing to learn. So keep up the good work.
So that’s how one gets a well-formed conscience. And to think, mine has been so malformed all this time.
–G
actually, war is sometimes necessary according to Judeo-Christian ethics. The war in iraq was just up for debate on whether or not it is/was necessary.
Another attack on the evil “neo-cons” is twarted. If this obsession wasn’t so pitiful it would be funny.
Hate to disagree with the Lutheran bunny above — btw, how’s it hanging, M? haven’t heard from you in awhile — but the Church’s teaching on abortion was not enacted “ex cathedra,” signaling a new development.
Rather, it is much more organic than that. The Church’s hard-line stance on abortion is considered to be “of the faith,” because the Church (the people and the priests) have always been against abortion.
However, to answer Radley’s jibe, Christian pacifism is a much more particular belief. It has never been considered “of the faith” and it has never been enacted “ex cathedra” (a total of two “ex cathedra” declarations have been enacted and they both concearn Mary). Same goes for opposition to the death penalty.
The people of South Dakota elected Tom Daschle to represent them in the US Senate. Not the Pope, not Bishop Carlson, or anyone else. Anyone who would say this is a good idea is advocating going back to the days when people voted on candidates based on their religious faith, and nothing else.
I utterly despise Tom Daschle, but I think he can practice what ever denomination he wishes. I’m a Catholic as well. I wouldn’t consider myself one for very long if I had to agree with every issue the Church takes.
The Church does say that war is sometimes justified. This is called “Just War Theory”, established by St. Thomas Aquinas and St. Augustine.
The first principle is that war can only be fought as a last resort. This is a war of pre-emption. End of story.
The third principle says that war can only be fought to redress a wrong suffered. Therefore first strike is never justified.
Could it be any more clear? War may be justified under certain cirumstances, and these are not those circumstances. Pre-emptive war is never justified.
“Strict standards,” huh. Try reading them.
Jeremy Lott Writes:
“The Church’s hard-line stance on abortion is considered to be “of the faith,” because the Church (the people and the priests) have always been against abortion.”
That’s not quite true. The Catholic Church did not take an official stand against first trimester abortions until the 19th century (circa 1869, I think).
What a perfect smear!
It simultaneously highlights that Daschle is catholic (got that, evangelicals?), while giving catholics several excuses to vote against him. Perfect.
A bit more to the point — the pope officially came out against the war. From a catholic standpoint, Just War is not applicable in this situation.
Just an observation.
Lovely, the a la carte Catholicism of the right.
One would think that when splitting moral hairs over the rightness of a war they’d give more consideration to, oh, the Pope, than, oh, a prominent Methodist.
Then again, as they say, there’s a Methodism to the madness.
When in doubt, err on the side of not blwoing anyone up.
Bishop Carlson adds more ammunition for further weakening the U.S. Catholic Church. 50% of Catholics in the U.S. consider themselves “pro-choice” compared to 46% who consider themselves “pro-life.”
Should half of American Catholics quit the Church?
BTW, the link for that statistic is:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/guest_scholar/gs000112.asp
Since when is a politician bound to make decisions based on a personal morality? It is possible to believe that abortion (in this case) is wrong but also that the risk to public health that would arise by making it illegal is the defining issue in making this policy decision. Arguing that abortion should be legal is completely different than arguing that having an abortion is a laudable act.
Public policy, when made properly, is based on what impact it will have on a society - not whether or not it agrees with some narrow definition of morality…
Catholic canon has no prohibition against abortion - it was something they argued about, but they never came down on a side. The whole anti-abortion thing is relatively modern.
I guess that means Catholics have to inform their own consciences.
So nobody can make the distinction between the Minority Leader of the U.S. Senate, an elected official who has ENORMOUS influemce and power over legislation which ultimately becomes the law of the land……
And a few columnists who write opinion pieces?
I guess Jonah Goldberg is off the hook…
I wonder if the Weekly Standard would crow about a bishop getting on Rick Santorum’s case for favoring the death penalty. Wait, that would demand that the right drop one of their many double standards.
The bishop must have forgotten that we’re all sinners, I suppose.
No, that wasn’t the issue. Perhaps you should re-read the post.
Tom Daschle is perfectly within his religious beliefs to excercise his legislative duties to permit an American woman determine whether to have an abortion. Voting for a law that required a woman to have an abortion would run afoul of the Church. However, let me point out that neither of these things has happened: The Federal government can elect to fund abortion or contraception to teach women about them, but it does not directly regulate it (traditionally and generally constitutionally the work of states). Remember, if Roe v. Wade were overturned, it would merely send the matters to state legislatures. The Bishop is saying that Daschle can’t be Roman Catholic and argue that the states should not forbid these matters to the extent that the Supreme Court permits. I do not think that Tom Daschles arguments are subject to Papal review or censure.
Maybe Tom Daschle should start conforming to Catholocism and enact laws making molesting little boys legal.
Multi pronged effort by the conservatives. They get to show that THESE people are not in good standing with THEIR religion and thus are not in good standing with GOD. This makes it easier for the pod mind to ignore anything these individuals say, after all, “God doesn’t approve of them, why should I?” Keeps those pod minds closed like a Chik-Fil-A on Sunday.
They get to further divide the Catholic Church (anyone who thinks conservatism is a friend of Catholicism is damb fool.)
This subject will be huge fodder for deceitful, hypocritical conservatives on talk radio and Fox TV.
The question is, do the pro-choicer’s/democrats have the balls to challenge the ‘conservatives’ on the same front?
Conservatives work with, take money from, honor and empower Rev. Moon. Why not demand that these hypocrites DENOUNCE their ’sugar daddy’ and ‘go to’ guy. Moon claims he is the Messiah, says Jesus Christ FAILED and Moon says he detests ‘American style democracy’….all in all, I’d say it is high time the conservatives go on TV and disown their savior, Moon. You are with him or against him. They should denounce Moon or STOP CALLING THEMSELVES CHRISTIANS.
George Bush 43 shouldn’t call Moon ‘the man with the vision’ while helping him gain credibility and power and then call himself a “Christian” …this is fraud.
George Bush 41 shouldn’t have Moon sponsor his inaugural prayer luncheon, then hand out moonie literature afterward promoting Moon, and then claim to be “Christian”…
Republican’s should not work with Moon to implement his agenda of driving us towards a theocratic government and still call themselves ‘defender’s of the constitution’…this is a fraud.
From: http://www.au.org/churchstate/cs6013.htm
“The “faith-based summit” itself was sponsored by Watts (R-Okla.), Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) and other top congressional Republicans, but efforts to promote it at the grassroots level were turned over to a Moon organization . . .
While a number of Republican-aligned private organizations have promoted President George W. Bushâs religion funding scheme, only Moon won an official relationship with the Republican leadership to rally grassroots forces on behalf of the “faith-based” summit. This enhanced status enabled him to do grassroots political organizing â and religious recruitment â with the apparent blessing of Bush and his GOP allies in Congress.
-
Conservatives who claim to support the constitution and claim to be ‘Christians’ should go on TV and denounce their ’sugar daddy’ their ‘go to’ guy for the last twenty years. They should beg forgiveness from Jesus Christ and when they are done they can beg forgiveness from the American people…they should admit their movement is real evil and would not be in power without the systematic deceit foisted on the American public over the last twenty years. The conservative movement in America is nothing more than the John Birch Society on steroids. It’s short sightedness will destroy the nation/world as it is well on its way to doing.
Moon is laughing his ass off.
http://www.geocities.com/nomoonies/chronicles/a_moon_primer.html
ooops,
”’George Bush 43 shouldn’t call Moon ‘the man with the vision’ while helping him gain credibility and power and then call himself a “Christian” …this is fraud.
George Bush 41 shouldn’t have Moon sponsor his inaugural prayer luncheon, then hand out moonie literature afterward promoting Moon, and then claim to be “Christian”…”’
oops, the 41 and 43’s should flip flopped there. 41 is the one who travels the world helping Moon reach his goals, 43 had him sponsor the inaugural prayer luncheon and with the republican party works with the Moon organization to implement a more theocratic government.
Bush just named a long time Moon operative to head VISTA. David Caprara….Yep, Bush named a man who believes Moon is the Messiah and that the moon organization should rule the world to head our volunteer organizations. Bush just gave Moon’s sex abstinance program “Free Teens” a half a milion of OUR tax dollars to help him empower his movement.
This is why it is so damb funny when conservatives accuse ‘liberals’ of being unpatriotic or ‘treasonous’
Sorry, kemptonslim. I was referring to the previous post. We must have done a simultaneous.
Related to Brian’s comment several posts up, but a slightly different take: the RCC says teaches that a woman may not have an abortion, but does it say also that governments must penalize it? I think not. The church teaches on matters of individual morality; I don’t think the Pope considers himself a political philosopher.
Y’all, Tom Daschle is not in communion with the church. He’s divorced. He isn’t entitled to call himself Catholic, any more than I’m entitled to call myself Catholic. Given that he also doesn’t support them theologically, and does act legislatively to facilitate something that the Church has classified as one of the four “sins that cry out to heaven for vengeance”, I don’t actually think it’s unreasonable for the Bishop to ask a man who does not participate in the sacraments of the church to stop identifying himself as a member of that church.
Incidentally, the Church’s stance on the death penalty is even more recent, and less theologically binding, than its stance on abortion.
http://www.cath4choice.org/nobandwidth/English/cathwomen/abortiondecision.htm
Lots of information here. No, the Church has not always been against abortion - it was considered a moral wrong but not to the point of excommunication.
St. Augustine: Early Abortion Is Not Homicide
St. Augustine (354-430) condemned abortion because it breaks the connection between sex and procreation. 1 However, in the Enchiridion, he says, “But who is not rather disposed to think that unformed fetuses perish like seeds which have not fructified” â clearly seeing hominization as beginning or occurring at some point after the fetus has begun to grow. He held that abortion was not an act of homicide. Most theologians of his era agreed with him.
In a disciplinary sense, the general agreement at this time was that abortion was a sin requiring penance if it was intended to conceal fornication and adultery.
*****
I wonder how many fundie Republicans we could catch with THAT particular net?
Blondie - Augustine later repudiated when science caught up to him. His misunderstanding (quickening and all) was simply a failure of science to inform us when life began.
And Catholics for Choice is neither.
Thanks for this note. I’ve been trying to figure out why Bush was so interested in saving the Clinton creation, AmeriCorps. It’s becoming obvious now that his support for AmeriCorps, the Senior Corps and such programs as VISTA is all designed to subvert the nonsectarian aims of all those organizations in favor of “faith-based” legions who will spread the Republican/fundamentalist word. Forget the Moon associations: Moonies, fundies are fascisti by another name. This is all about the culture war the neoconservatives are revving up to full speed. Watch your backs. It’s not a conspiracy if they’re really out to get you.
—-Bush just named a long time Moon operative to head VISTA. David Caprara….Yep, Bush named a man who believes Moon is the Messiah and that the moon organization should rule the world to head our volunteer organizations. Bush just gave Moon’s sex abstinance program “Free Teens” a half a milion of OUR tax dollars to help him empower his movement.—-
Bush named another long time moonie to assistant trade rep. Any study of Moon will tell you this isn’t your Kennedy/Pope thing. Moon has every intention of manipulating the world to his goals. Anyone who is a member has the same goal. It is of CONSTANT thought of all his followers. He is their Messiah.
If you think about how close it was in 2000, does anyone think that without Moon’s billions spent over the last couple decades, propping up theocratic/fascist thought, (Moon owns and has personally directed the Washington Times) that Bush would have been close enough to steal the election? Not a chance. Billions to right wing think tanks, the paper, individuals(Moon bailed out Falwell for one of many)
Moon, In his mind and in fact, had more to do with selecting our president than ANY American. Tell that to your mother and see what she says as she pulls that rpub lever. haha
Look at our world. Moon is all over it too, his group is handing out membership cards so they can identify one another when and if, the world’s economies collapse. You can lump Moon any way you want, make no mistake, he or whoever is behind him is driving the bus and the conservatives put him there.
Moon IS laughing his ass off.
Hey this is the tip of the iceberg…
http://www.geocities.com/nomoonies/chronicles/a_moon_primer.html
Moon gave a million bucks to Bush’s presidential library, what would the hypocrites on the right say if Clinton took that kind of money? hahaha We live in a strange world. Our conservative breathern have no idea what they are doing. I know ten people right now who I can listen to Rush today and tell you what they will think they thought up tomorrow. They are auto pilot and Rove knows it. Scary stuff. Moonies, I have read threads at FR where they “thank God for Rev. Moon” you think the right doesn’t have some serious mental health problems?
Learn about the man who tells the conservatives what to think. Their Savior.
http://wfmu.org/playlists/DX
November 12, 2002: FTR 291: From Kennebunkport to Pearl Harbor: Bush, Moon, & the Rising Sun. (rerun from 6/11/01)
—-
http://discover.npr.org/features/feature.jhtml?wfId=1000731
Brooke speaks with Nansook Hong, author of In the Shadow of the Moons (Little Brown). Ms. Hong was the former daughter-in-law of the Reverend Sun Myung Moon, founder of the Unification Church. She broke away from the church, and left her husband, Hyo Jin, Moon’’s heir apparent.
Gov. John Ellis Bush - sometimes referred to as “Jeb!” - is a converted Catholic, yet signs death penalty warrants left and right. Not a peep from the Church.
Gov. John Ellis Bush - sometimes referred to as “Jeb!” - is a converted Catholic, yet signs death penalty warrants left and right. Not a peep from the Church.
http://www.ringtones-dir.com/get/ ringtones site free. ringtones site free, ringtones site, Free nokia ringtones here. From website .
http://www.ringtones-dir.com/get/ ringtones site. Best free samsung ringtones, Cingular ringtones and more, Ringtones for free. From website .