I'm not a ND alum, but I am a practicing Catholic. I'm particularly disturbed by ND alum appologists and other nominally Catholic supporters of Obama's visit.
Look, there doesn't need to be a debate about abortion at ND. ND needs to start teaching the Catholic Church's position on abortion, and more focefully, because there are evidently thousands of alums who don't understand it.
It is particularly disturbing to see comparisons made between abortion and capital punishment. The Church says that abortion is always wrong. It allows that capital punishment COULD BE permissible, but in this day and age that it should not be used (evidently other forms of punishment are sufficient).
Obama's speech was his typical "Can't we all get along" BS. Yeah Barry, I'll compromise my position when I see any evidence that you've compromised yours. As usual, Obama's speech is "Just Words".
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
19 comments:
Buzz -
Per your other comments - the President just is giving too much face time - and it may just work against him.
Here's a recent Gallup poll that indicates at least the initial response to the President's message around life is actually strengthening the resolve of the opposition and pushing moderates the other way.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/118399/More-Americans-Pro-Life-Than-Pro-Choice-First-Time.aspx
Notice - even among Catholics the position is changing.
Not sure what is going on with the Catholic Universities - consider also the fiasco at Georgtown - but I thought sadder commentary here was the the Bishop remained silent. He didn't attend - but he remained silent all the same.
So I know you will get sick of seeing Mr. Obama - but hey - let him keep talking. The more he talks, the more people get to say - "Uh - what did he just say?".
Wish I had a camera this morning saw a pickup truck with an Obama "Hope" campaign sticker on it. There was a new one slapped on over it that said "Obama Sucks".
Created an issue as we discussed the appropriateness of such a message with the kids on the way to school, but nonetheless illustrates the changing sentiment for the President.
Yeah, the homily yesterday was about "the 4 types of love". No mention of ND or the controversy.
Catholicism is falling by the wayside because the priesthood is too much about getting along and kumbayah. They don't teach the layity about what it means to be Catholic and what the faith says about these issues.
I gave $100 to Lake County for Life the other day. First time I ever did anything like that. Take that, Obama.
See Kevin Tracy's post today and resultant comments: http://ktracy.com/?p=3800
Steve, I love your comment there. That is exactly how I feel. We're such a bunch of dumbasses with a muddles message.
As opposed to the Evangelicals, who are always on message, know EXACTLY what they believe, and aren't afraid to tell you.
It's like Catholics are afraid to express what we believe.
BTW, how many Catholics know that their vote for Obama was a SIN?
I don't care for catholicism because it's typcially the catholic way or no way. We have a big problem with Lutherans like that down here as well.
In this case it wasn't ND that made this about abortion - it was radical catholics and politicians. I'd like to make some great analogies, but my allergies and medications have me in a daze and I can't get them together.
BigReub, you do realize that it's a religion? With a religion, it's usually "my way or the highway".
Obama scored a huge coup with his visit to Notre Dame. He exploited them for his own purposes, and in the end used them like a cheap whore.
"With a religion, it's usually "my way or the highway"."
As far as mainstream religions in the US I can only think of Catholicism and Lutheran that act this way.
My church is no where near my way or the highway. It's a Disciples of Christ church and we have Catholics, Lutherans, and Jews in regular attendance. If you beleive that Jesus is your lord and saviour - that's good enough.
I fear that religion and politics are following the same path. There is no middle ground - you are either right or wrong, with me or against me.
Now, to be clear, I don't hold anyone's religion against them - as long as those religious beleifs are being constantly thrown in my face.
BigReub, Notre Dame missed a teachable moment. It gave Obama an HONORARY DEGREE. It essentially said, "how bad can abortion be, if we give the abortionist-in-chief an honorary degree?"
I don't think that we Catholics need to be hard asses against people that don't agree with us. I do think that we need to be true to our beliefs. Doing so would be to invite Obama, but not bestow the honorary degree on him. If ND had done that, I don't think that there would be much controversy there.
It's not a difficult thing to understand, in fact it is at our core as Americans. "We hold these truths to be self-evident..." rings as true in Religion as it does politics.
There are certain moral truths that Catholics hold as self-evident and that do not change over time or because of popular opinion. The day that the Church makes a compromise on these issues is the day to discard Catholicism.
Anyone that compromises these tenants should be immediately and firmly challenged. As Ben Franklin said, "He who would trade liberty for some temporary security, deserves neither liberty nor security" - so it is with Catholicism. Compromise on these issues- and you deserve nothing.
That's what this Notre Dame issue is about. A Catholic University is compromising on a core tenant and giving President Obama both a platform and an implicit endorsement for his abortion agenda. This is unacceptable.
True - to be Catholic you have to do more than believe Jesus Christ is your Lord and Savior. You also have to believe what he said - and there wasn't a hell of a lot of middle ground with Jesus. (e.g. A man cannot serve two masters, Leave your family and all possessions behind if you want to follow me - more if I spent the time) Further He passed his earthly mantle to Peter with the authority to bind or loose.
But to take a stand is not throwing Catholicism in your face - again it is on the call of Christ to "Go and teach all nations".
This is not to say that middle ground is unacceptable in politics (barring of course unalienable rights)- I agree with you there that the parties are over-polarized and it compromises the security of this nation.
My friends and I always say there are two things that should never be discussed (or argued) among friends - politics and religion.
And we are combining both in one argument.
You won't convince me Notre Dame endorses Obama's beliefs on abortion. ND nor Obama mentioned abortion when he was invited. Outsiders made this about abortion. There are many more issues in this world than abortion, but there are a few that think that if abortion ended today the world would instantly be better. Similar to idiots that make gay marriage the big item at the state house all the time. Will that honestly affect anyone's life?
And I think there can be middle ground in any religion. Do you honestly think that a catholic has never had an abortion? Or that someone that had an abortion has never later attended, or even joined, a catholic church? I can't prove either way, but you'll have an equally hard time arguing against it.
Different topic, but same idea. Lutherans (at least the type down here) are not allowed to join any organization that has secrets (the Masons, for example). The Masonic lodge here has several lutherans on the membership rolls. Does that make them not-lutheran. According to arguments I am reading here, yes.
Either way, none us are going to be swayed.
BigReub - although I enjoy your posts - we're not friends, this is an appropriate forum, and I think we've shown we can handle it.
I'll take on your argument with one qualifier - there is not a single Catholic in this world that has had an abortion and not confessed it as a sin. That's because canon law states that the moment the child is killed the woman and all conspirators in an abortion are automatically and immediately excommunicated - and are therefore not Catholic. They can not regain membership in the Church without absolution for the sin and the excommunication.
Now that is not to say that there are no Catholics that have had an abortion and have been welcomed back into the Church - I will concede that point. I will also concede that: Catholics have killed, stolen, committed adultery, have beared false witness, coveted their neighbors' wife and ass (in my own case my neighbor's wife's ass), eschewed their parents, skipped mass, engaged in idolotry. Hell I've even known a few to use the Lord's name in vain for Christ's sake. But I would not suggest that we ammend the 10 commandments. In the same way I expect the Church and Catholics not to buckle under the weight of popular opinion.
What's troubling here is we are not talking about a politician with a moderate stand on abortion. We are talking about the "poster boy" of abortion. His voting record in Illinois, the US Senate and his first executive orders have all consistently been to the extreme on the pro-Life issue. His voting would not even protect survivors of botched abortions. The fact that he is President helps drive complacency among Catholics - the fact that he is invited to speak at Catholic Universities (Georgetown included) is unacceptable.
Look the Gallup Poll I posted here shows that in only 2 of the last 10 years did even a majority of Catholics consider themselves Pro-Life. Is it any wonder with the mixed message that the Church leaders are sending? The USCCB has stated that Catholics should not vote for a candidate that takes a stand in support of abortion (with some qualifiers so that abortion is not the only crireria for voting). What should we say then about a bishop that says nothing when the "poster boy" speaks at a Catholic institution in his diocese? Sure he didn't attend - I think he may have tried to be PC with a "let him speak, but don't honor him" argument (that goes for you too Buzz - am I the first to call you PC?) But with the exception of Tim Geithner - would anyone stand for such blatent hypocrisy on the political front? (cont)
Canon law actually goes further to state that the automatic excommunication applies to all conspirators including those whose counsel and encouragement made it morally possible for a woman to have an abortion. So there are clergy at GT, ND and the bishop himself that have potentially made themselves culpable with their silence or complacency. (I'll leave the final determination to their own conscience).
Anyway - I am not trying to sway you one way or the other. Believe that abortion had nothing to do with the speech. I think you're naive to think the President does not benefit from the implicit endorsement from ND and GT and that it wasn't part of his decision criteria in accepting the invitations. But my point is this - this is a Catholic issue. When I see the Church in a public forum exercising such hypocrisy I have a right, a duty, to object. I refuse to apologize for being Catholic - with as much passion as I would refuse to apologize for being American. I also refuse to accept the mantle of "radical Catholic" you so easily dispense for those who would speak out against these public displays of hypocrisy. [Actually on another post Doug would say I am not radical enough] I believe your comments in that regard to reveal your ignorance of the Catholic position on the subject and your presumption about what it means to be Catholic in the US. There is no such thing as an ala carte Catholic - if your faith is diluted to such a degree - you're not in a Church you're in a club.
My question then is this...
If you had a catholic friend that had an abortion would you have to then shun that person? If you didn't and remained friends with that person wouldn't you then be endorsing the abortion?
And if they can gain re-admission with absolution then the church, IMO, does have some gray area to it, correct? The talk seems to be all or none, but this shows some middle ground, does it not?
I ask, not to jab, but because I am interested. Based on talking to Catholic friends and seeing how Catholics act down here I'm not a fan of the religion. Do I know everything about it - no way. But I do feel it is far to unforgiving.
I don't know Canon Law (or what it even means) nor do I know what USCCB is.
To head in a different direction, a friend from here (the bride), who is catholic, was marrying another catholic in a different city. The groom's family was super catholic (you may know the actual term) to the point that the bride's family was not going to be allowed to attend the wedding without first going thru some sort of act or something. Why/what was that?
I would rather make this discussion educational.
If you had a catholic friend that had an abortion would you have to then shun that person?"
No - Catholic or otherwise. Look, I have some pretty harsh criticism of ND, GT and the local bishops but that's because like it or not they are public figures representing the Roman Catholic Church. Further they are engaged in a hypocrisy that confuses not only Catholics but the perception of Non-Catholics toward the Church (take your own perception that the Church is unforgiving.) - the bishops specifically. The USCCB is the US Conference of Catholic Bishops. They provide guidance on faith to US Catholics. They have stated that US Catholics should not vote for a pro-abortion candidate (as I said with some qualifiers necessary in case all candidates are pro-abortion or the only one that is not is otherwise undesirable). With such a strong stand when facing Catholics - how can it be perceived as anything else but hypocrisy when they remain silent, when President Obama (such a staunch advocate of abortion rights) benefits from implicit endorsements of the Catholic Universities. It's outrageous! However the criticism is directed toward the roles of the individuals - not the individuals themselves. Their culpability in this regard remains a matter for them to take up with their respective consciences.
To direct that same harsh criticism to an individual would be judgmental, and in so doing I would damn myself. Essentially, the same standard I would apply to others would be applied to me (Ref. Matthew 7:1-3). Does this mean Catholics don't judge? No - just means it’s a sin to do so.
"If you didn't and remained friends with that person wouldn't you then be endorsing the abortion?"
No. On a personal level, there is not guilt by association. The implicit endorsement of ND and GT is because of their role as public faces of the Catholic Church. Their status as academic institutions just adds credibility to their endorsements. Remember also to be a conspirator in the abortion, (according to canon law - simply the internal laws of the Catholic Church on theology) counsel would have had to have been given BEFORE the abortion in such a way that influenced the person to have the abortion or believe that it would be acceptable. By granting their endorsements to President Obama – they are influencing the moral perception moving forward. AFTER an abortion, helping a friend contend with the issues she will face with and working back to a state of grace within the Church would be expected of a friend.
"And if they can gain re-admission with absolution then the church, IMO, does have some gray area to it, correct? The talk seems to be all or none, but this shows some middle ground, does it not?"
No. Granting absolution does not in anyway condone the act that put the person outside a state of grace. Nor does it come at no cost to the penitent. In order to achieve absolution the penitent must (1) have sincere contrition. That is, they must truly be sorry. The best way to think of this is even if they go through the motions and are actually granted absolution in words - Christ knows whether the contrition is sincere and there would actually be no absolution. (2) They must confess. That is, the person must state each and every occurrence of an offending act. Further they must accept accountability for that act. (3) They must accept and execute penance. This means that there is some corrective action delivered by a priest that is commensurate to the act committed. (4) Then finally the person is granted absolution. In the case of an excommunicate - the person must seek out the appropriate path in the proper jurisdiction prior to starting this process. This is because as an excommunicate - the person does not have the sacrament of confession available to them.
"I ask, not to jab, but because I am interested. Based on talking to Catholic friends and seeing how Catholics act down here I'm not a fan of the religion. Do I know everything about it - no way. But I do feel it is far to unforgiving. "
This is part of the problem - the confusion that is created when church representative in the public eye show hesitation in delivering the message of the Church. As I said forgiveness is the cornerstone of the Catholic Church. Consider the story of two apostles:
Judas betrays Christ and it would have been better that he was never born
Peter betrays Christ and he is made the cornerstone of the Church
What’s the difference? Peter asked for forgiveness.
The standards of the Catholic Church are not easy to meet - this is why forgiveness is the "cornerstone" of the Catholic Church. Each and every Catholic falls in their attempt to achieve this standard – but each and every Catholic also has the sacrament of confession available to achieve forgiveness and continue on. Forgiveness does not mean the act is forgotten, it just means it is remembered in a different way. In the pressure of public opinion - greater understanding of the role of forgiveness is required, not some sort of comprise on the standards in order to achieve some middle ground.
Regarding your friend I suspect she is marrying an Eastern Orthodox.
I don't know that much about their rites and rituals but there are differences on such topics as papal infallibility and Mary's Immaculate Conception.
One additional difference is that the RC Church accepts a marriage in a EO Church - while the reverse is not true. I suspect that there is some ritualistic reason on the EO side for the scenario you decribe but I do not know for sure.
Thanks, Federalist.
Post a Comment