Phil Lawler nails it:
Spare me, please, from the excited praise of “courageous” American bishops who have issued statements saying that abortion advocacy by President Biden (and other Catholic politicians) is incompatible with the Catholic faith.
Of course it’s incompatible with our faith. Everyone knows that. Is it really “courageous” to affirm what everyone already knows? Perhaps it would make more sense—and more difference—to bemoan the cowardice of bishops who fail to reaffirm the obvious.
For more than forty years now, American bishops have been issuing statements saying roughly the same thing. (Some statements have been more forceful than others, and I’ll grant that some prelates deserve credit for their eloquence.) For more than forty years, Catholic politicians have been ignoring them.
The question for American bishops is not whether Biden et al can reconcile their actions with Catholic moral principles. We know the answer to that question: they cannot. The question, your eminences and excellencies, is: What are you going to do about it?
Go here to read the rest. Faithful Catholics have learned to expect nothing from their Bishops and they are rarely disappointed in that expectation.
Bishops must do more that use their mouths to proclaim Catholic doctrine. Their mouths also should have bite by the deft use of excommunication. Catholic politicians who supports abortion must be excommunicated. If they did this we would know they were serious.
Trust me, we don’t expect “nothing”. We’ve actually come to expect aid and comfort to the enemy. Seriously. I mean, where was this “eloquence” when it mattered? Sins of omission are actually a thing with God. The sad fact is that Catholics are not just up against the secular Left, they are facing down the Leftist Quislings from within the Church which is the ultimate betrayal. I am convinced that is precisely why Jesus allowed Judas to be his betrayer.
Excommunication in our current climate will only happen IF it’s applied “equally” across all sides of the political and ideological spectrum. When it can be issued against polluters, bigots real and imagined, death penalty promoters etc., then it will be on the table as an option; effectively as a means to get folks clamoring for its use to shut up unless they want their perceived allies to get the same treatment. I know perfectly well that there’s a marked difference between fundamental moral teaching regarding abortion, euthanasia, marriage and family; and issues calling for prudential judgment. Nevertheless, unless and until excommunication can be used across the political and ideological spectrum, I don’t expect it to be widely used.
Nevertheless, unless and until excommunication can be used across the political and ideological spectrum, I don’t expect it to be widely used.
I expect precisely nothing to be done with abortion supporting politicians other than our current Pope celebrating them:
https://www.cal-catholic.com/pope-francis-praises-italys-leading-abortion-rights-proponent/
My guess is that the best thing for them to do is send out a pastoral letter placed as an insert in church bulletins reminding parish clergy and laity that these politicians are self-excommunicate and should be escorted out by ushers if they attempt to present themselves for communion. Yeah, I know. Fat chance.
“Nevertheless, unless and until excommunication can be used across the political and ideological spectrum, I don’t expect it to be widely used.”
Excommunication is not a political or ideological tool. It is a means to draw an unrepentant sinner back to the Church:
https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05678a.htm
Now abortion is an intrinsic evil – something which no one can support either formally or materially.
The Death Penalty is not an intrinsic evil (even the revised Catechism does not say so). As with pollution and the other ideological points you strive to make, one may make the prudential judgment of one solution or another to a social problem. Unless one goes about using the Death Penalty on clearly innocent victims (which in the end is what abortion is) your analogy is false.
At the rate the current pontiff is transforming the American episcopate, statements like Gomez’ will be the stuff of nostalgic memory.
The directive is clear: the Church is supposed to be the amiable doxy of neoliberalism.
“Of course it’s incompatible with our faith. Everyone knows that.”
Yeah, but for at least 60 years people have been taught that one’s political positions can – should! – be unrelated to one’s religious positions. That lesson hasn’t been taught consistently; I’ve never heard a politician say that he’s personally opposed to poverty but minimum wage should be between the person and his employer. But the lesson is so ingrained in us that it actually means something when bishops speak up.
To equate the murder of an unborn child with the execution of an individual who has been justly convicted of taking the life of a born human being is an absurdity. Where were these Bishops who now issue reservations about Mr. Biden’s policies for the first time, when it may have made a difference? Probably voting for him. Biden’s exhibition of his “devout “ Catholicism will damage the Church, especially among Non-Catholics who oppose child murder. Are not those Bishops who remained silent when it may have mattered accessories before the fact to the increased murder of the unborn under Biden? As pointed out by others, that Judas was one of the original twelve chosen by Christ contained a message.
At the rate the current pontiff is transforming the American episcopate, statements like Gomez’ will be the stuff of nostalgic memory.
I doubt Francis’ aim is any better than John Paul’s in this regard.
Re: Phillip @ “Excommunication is not a political or ideological tool. It is a means to draw an unrepentant sinner back to the Church:”
Sure, I agree. My point wasn’t about what I think should be done, but about what the likely criteria are in the minds of those weighing the matter of excommunication, or for that matter the lesser sanction of refusing holy communion. It wasn’t really about “my analogy”. It was about the state of affairs in the American Catholic Church.
Chris,
Thanks.
“I doubt Francis’ aim is any better than John Paul’s in this regard.”
He can’t do it all himself–some good ones sneak through, to be sure. When Saginaw authorizes a Latin Mass, you know the filter failed.
But he’s playing a longer game–stack the next conclave and his successor will continue to sand down the American bench with more McElroys, Cupiches, etc.
Who in turn will make sure their seminaries are “Goodbye Good Men” territory, further “progressivizing” the candidate stream.
Process-starting: he says it all the time.
The American Church hierarchy is like the Republican establishment. They expect to be viewed as strong defenders of the truth because after they let things break they complain a little rather than publicly celebrating.
Dale, I would agree your scenario is likely. At the same time, a commenter on another blog pointed out earlier this week that past patterns of Cardinal-creating by various popes have failed to produce a successor in the mold presumably desired by the one handing out the red hats. His words: “The College of Cardinals appointed entirely by Popes Pius XI and Pius XII elected John XXIII, the college appointed entirely by Paul VI gave us John Paul II, and the college of cardinals appointed 57% by Francis (which includes men like Cardinal Muller, Cardinal Ladaria and Cardinal Bo) is not necessarily going to follow that pattern. How many Cardinals, especially the more conservative, orthodox ones from Asia and Africa, are going to look objectively at the trainwreck that is the Francis Pontificate, with it’s out of control corruption in the Vatican, dwindling Mass attendance, dwindling donations, watering down of doctrine (especially on sexual issues) and increased ridicule, and say “yes, we need more of the same”? (From commenter Johann du Toit at One Peter Five). An interesting observation.
But he’s playing a longer game–stack the next conclave and his successor will continue to sand down the American bench with more McElroys, Cupiches, etc.
I hear you. It’s just that the episcopacy appointed by Piux Xi and Pius Xii gave you the mess of Vatican II. The College appointed by John Paul gave you Benedict; some additional appointments by Benedict gave you Francis. I don’t doubt that intention matters here and Francis and others are ill-intentioned, just suggesting there are other vectors at work here.
I should note that there are 3,000 ordinaries the world over. I’m going to wager that less mind goes into these appointments than we may realize.