McBrien Still Hanging Onto Seamless Garment

[HagiaSophia]

Fr Richard McBrien still clinging to the seamless garment theory developed by Cdl Bernardin (RIP) takes some backhanded swipes at bishops who remained loyal to the church’s teaching on the primary non negotiable of the abortion issue in the election campaign.

"…Bishop Skylstad had been vice president for the past three years and, by tradition, should have received 70-80 percent support on the first ballot. Although he was elected on the first ballot, it was with only 52 percent of the votes cast.

A number of bishops apparently voted against him because he had explicitly promoted the consistent ethic of life approach during the recent political campaign. He had not argued, as several of his brother-bishops did, that the election hinged on abortion alone and that a Catholic was morally obliged to vote against Senator Kerry.

If there was any doubt about this, papal biographer George Weigel made it absolutely clear in a recent interview in the National Catholic Reporter. He dismissed the most recent voter guide issued by the Conference as “a last gasp effort to hold onto the tattered seamless garment,” and praised those individual bishops who had defied the Conference’s longstanding policy against a one-issue approach and against “endorsing or opposing” candidates for election.

However, Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver, the most visible advocate of the Weigel view, received only 5 votes for the Conference presidency and only 6 for the vice-presidency.

Not exactly a ringing endorsement.

the-tidings.com/2004/1217/essays.htm

 

[katherine2]

HagiaSophia:

Fr Richard McBrien still clinging to the seamless garment theory developed by Cdl Bernardin…

The Cardinal simply coined the term. The theory was invented by a first centiry Jewish rabbi named Jesus.

 

[katherine2]

HagiaSophia:

Fr Richard McBrien still clinging to the seamless garment theory developed by Cdl Bernardin…

The Cardinal simply coined the term. The theory was developed by a first century Jewish rabbi named Jesus.

 

[Trelow]

katherine2:

The Cardinal simply coined the term. The theory was developed by a first century Jewish rabbi named Jesus.

 

[maendem]

katherine2:

The Cardinal simply coined the term. The theory was developed by a first century Jewish rabbi named Jesus.

 

[caroljm36]

OK, what is this seamless garment business? I asked at AAA but the thread never appeared. Is this doctrine or not? I have not found it in the CCC.

 

[BLB_Oregon]

caroljm36:

OK, what is this seamless garment business? I asked at AAA but the thread never appeared. Is this doctrine or not? I have not found it in the CCC.

Also, please identify the point of the original post. I found it disturbing that George Bush, for instance, refused to sign a bill into law as governor of Texas that would have prohibited the execution of the mentally retarded. Although abortion is a bigger problem than capital punishment from both the standpoint of sheer numbers and that of the innocence of the victims, I was disappointed that so many put their eggs in Mr. Bush’s basket without challenging him on that point. To make my point: why are we having a dispute over “abortion alone” vs. “seamless garment” politics? It is not as if the seamless garment proponents aren’t against abortion, too.

 

[HagiaSophia]

caroljm36:

OK, what is this seamless garment business? I asked at AAA but the thread never appeared. Is this doctrine or not? I have not found it in the CCC.

If you will read the entire article in the first post, McBrien gives a quick review - basically “all life issues are equal” - it doesn’t coincide with what the church has always taught but then that’s never bothered McBrien before.

 

[caroljm36]

HagiaSophia:

If you will read the entire article in the first post, McBrien gives a quick review - basically “all life issues are equal” - it doesn’t coincide with what the church has always taught but then that’s never bothered McBrien before.

Sorry, I didn’t see the link at the bottom…

I kinda knew what it was about but wondered where it fit in our theology. Politically, it seems just way to justify not voting for Republicans, namely Reagan at the time Bernardin came up with this idea, and of course anyone like him.

Politically it seems ineffectual. Like some of our arguments here, that go basically ABORTION! / WAR! EUTHENASIA! / SOCIAL JUSTICE! ad infinitum with no one moving one way or the other. And it seems creepily like a way of accommodating legal abortion.

If it’s not doctrine than I won’t worry about it

 

[katherine2]

Seamless garment is the opposite of Cafeteria Catholicism. I teaches that Christ does not give us permission to ignore or be unconcerned or be silent about some social evils bewcause we have determined we are only going to follow Christ on issue #1 and #2 and, if we get around to it, #3.

Some say the Church should not wtiness against certain social evils because they have determined they are not “priorities”.

Seemless garment says the churches social teachings are all one fabric. You can save the lives of millions, but that does not mean it then becomes moral for you to kill a single person.

 

[Trelow]

katherine2:

Seamless garment is the opposite of Cafeteria Catholicism. I teaches that Christ does not give us permission to ignore or be unconcerned or be silent about some social evils bewcause we have determined we are only going to follow Christ on issue #1 and #2 and, if we get around to it, #3.

Some say the Church should not wtiness against certain social evils because they have determined they are not “priorities”.

Seemless garment says the churches social teachings are all one fabric. You can save the lives of millions, but that does not mean it then becomes moral for you to kill a single person.

BUT people can have differing opinions on how to handle social issues, wither or not the Government should use tax money to fight them, or it’s a personal responsibility.

Those who use the cloak of the “seamless garment” use it to push a socialist agenda in leu of a moral one.

Some issues are more important. People needing to make more money and killing babies are not on the same level.

THE POOR AND OPPRESSED ARE BLESSED!
THE ABORTED, AND THE SOULS OF THE PARTICIPANTS ARE DEAD.

 

[caroljm36]

katherine2:

Seemless garment says the churches social teachings are all one fabric. You can save the lives of millions, but that does not mean it then becomes moral for you to kill a single person.

Of course not! But the Church has never equated killing an innocent unborn with the execution of a convicted murderer for example.

All the seamless garment approach ever did was neutralize us and render the Church ineffectual. Abortion is still with us, capital punishment is still with us, war is still with us, and the Church is like a puppy chasing its own tail.

 

[fix]

That old dissenting man is still around. He should have been given his walking papers years ago. His entire career is built on dissenting from the truth.

Cardinal Law and others started the idea for a new CCC specfically to debunk the false theology behind Bernardin’s seamless garment nonsense.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

fix:

That old dissenting man is still around. He should have been given his walking papers years ago. His entire career is built on dissenting from the truth.

Cardinal Law and others started the idea for a new CCC specfically to debunk the false theology behind Bernardin’s seamless garment nonsense.

What was false about it? Did Cardinal Bernadin claim that every issue was absolutely equal or have others made that assumption and run with it? I don’t think he did. I think he taught and meant that we needed a CONSISTENT teaching on the dignity of human life, but I don’t recall him saying that poverty issues (which touch on the dignity of human life) outweighed abortions. I’ve heard other rather odd Catholics say that about the “seamless garment,” but not him. I wouldn’t trust Cardinal Law to debunk much of anything. From what I’ve seen, I’d rather stand in Bernadin’s shoes on the Day of Judgement than Law’s.

 

[fix]

Just what is the Bernardin Legacy? Ask that simple question to any Catholic and the answers you receive will vary from one extreme to the other. One either loved him or despised him. But regardless of your personal opinion of the man there is one point, I believe, we can all agree on: He was a powerful and influential individual, both politically and spiritually. James Hitchcock wrote in an article published shortly after the Cardinal’s death that: “He [Bernardin] consistently used his influence to promote liberal causes, even attacks on Church teachings and traditions.” Hitchcock went on to say: “…he consistently used his power to build a network of allies within both the hierarchy and the bureaucracy, a network which in effect has controlled the direction of the ‘American Church’.”

Bernardin received the Presidential award from President Clinton and was honored, posthumously, by the Masons. He was a friend of Call To Action (CTA) and allowed them to operate on Church property. He even went so far as to speak out against Bishop Bruskewitz for excommunicating CTA members in his own diocese. History has taught us that the Cardinal usually came down on the liberal side of every issue, but what is his legacy? What about his faith?

As Catholics we know that our purpose in life is to know, love, and serve God, and as Archbishop of Chicago Bernardin had an even greater responsibility. Defending the faith and safeguarding the souls of the faithful was his job. How did he do? What was the condition of the Church in Chicago at the time of his passing, after 15 years of his leadership? That is his legacy.

Who did he live with? Who were his friends? (According to the 11/97 Washington Blade, a homosexual newspaper, the Cardinal himself had arranged for the *Windy City Gay Chorus *to sing at his wake at Holy Name Cathedral. It did so behind a sign prominently displaying its name.) What kinds of men did he associate with and help elevate to bishop? Who praised him? Who followed him and what was the result? RCF has spent the last four years looking for those answers…

rcf.org/docs/beginningoftheend.htm

 

[Minerva]

“seamless garment” sounds nice in theory, but in reality is has simply been a way to advocate socialism and downplay the abortion issue. It is a way for bishops and priests who are in bed witht the DNC to guilt-trip faithful Catholics who vote for pro-life Republicans. And it isn’t Catholic teaching either - remember the Vatican’s list of non-negotiable issues this election year? Catholics cannot be or vote pro-abortion. However Catholics can hold a variety of opinions on how the govt should handle poverty. the seamless garmentites would deny this liberty and impose socialism on us, while doing next to nothing about abortion.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

fix:

Just what is the Bernardin Legacy? Ask that simple question to any Catholic and the answers you receive will vary from one extreme to the other. One either loved him or despised him. But regardless of your personal opinion of the man there is one point, I believe, we can all agree on: He was a powerful and influential individual, both politically and spiritually. James Hitchcock wrote in an article published shortly after the Cardinal’s death that: “He [Bernardin] consistently used his influence to promote liberal causes, even attacks on Church teachings and traditions.” Hitchcock went on to say: “…he consistently used his power to build a network of allies within both the hierarchy and the bureaucracy, a network which in effect has controlled the direction of the ‘American Church’.”

Bernardin received the Presidential award from President Clinton and was honored, posthumously, by the Masons. He was a friend of Call To Action (CTA) and allowed them to operate on Church property. He even went so far as to speak out against Bishop Bruskewitz for excommunicating CTA members in his own diocese. History has taught us that the Cardinal usually came down on the liberal side of every issue, but what is his legacy? What about his faith?

As Catholics we know that our purpose in life is to know, love, and serve God, and as Archbishop of Chicago Bernardin had an even greater responsibility. Defending the faith and safeguarding the souls of the faithful was his job. How did he do? What was the condition of the Church in Chicago at the time of his passing, after 15 years of his leadership? That is his legacy.

Who did he live with? Who were his friends? (According to the 11/97 Washington Blade, a homosexual newspaper, the Cardinal himself had arranged for the *Windy City Gay Chorus *to sing at his wake at Holy Name Cathedral. It did so behind a sign prominently displaying its name.) What kinds of men did he associate with and help elevate to bishop? Who praised him? Who followed him and what was the result? RCF has spent the last four years looking for those answers…

rcf.org/docs/beginningoftheend.htm

The same questons can be asked of Law. I’m not defending Bernadin (I was, however, denouncing Law). I don’t actually know much about him personally. I just remember reading about the “seamless garment” in college and liking it very much. I never heard any implication, however, that within the seamless garment every issue was equal. I’ve heard people say that that is what the theory implies, but I just don’t see it from a plain reading. I’m also not defending McBrien. His stuff is so absurdly unorthodox.

 

[fix]

I almost forgot another Bernardin fiasco called common ground. A way to combine truth with error and still think you are a Catholic.

 

[katherine2]

“seamless garment” sounds nice in theory, but in reality is has simply been a way to advocate socialism and downplay the abortion issue.

The seamless garment doesn’t introduce any new issues to the Church’s social vision, it just speaks to the connectedness of all of the issues. So its seems it is Minerva who is damning a part of the church’s social vision as “socialist”. This leads me to more suspicion of her faithfulness than of Cardinal Bernardin’s.

… guilt-trip faithful Catholics who vote for pro-life Republicans.

Catholics who vote for many pro-life Republicans should feel gulity. I am not saying they should not vote as their conscience dictates. But if they are voting for people who do not support the entirity of the Church’s social vision, they should feel some gulit, particularly if they have not made their candidate know of their reservations on certain issues or otherwise worked to mitigate their support for a canddiate not behind the whole.

And it isn’t Catholic teaching either - remember the Vatican’s list of non-negotiable issues this election year?

That wasn’t the Vatican. That was layman Karl Keating after he tested the phrase through polling and focus groups. (Did Christ use focus groups for His message?).

Catholics cannot be or vote pro-abortion. However Catholics can hold a variety of opinions on how the govt should handle poverty.

Catholics are not free to advoate injustice to the poor or workers.

the seamless garmentites would deny this liberty and impose socialism on us, while doing next to nothing about abortion.

Actually, the seamless garment movement is the best thing that could happen to the pro-life movement. A good number of Americans are troubled and confused about abortion and are alienated from a pro-life movement that seems to be nothing but a faithfull and impotent junior partner to the right wing.

Its interesting that you, like many others, insist we 1) must vote for pro-life candidates, 2) can have different opinions about other issues, even in contradiction from the Church, and 3) Bash the seamless garment.

It seems to me your are terrified of th epossibility of seamless garments success because then you would faced with candidates who are pro-life AND pro-social justice, for which you have no intention of supporting despite your claim that Catholcis MUST vote a certain way.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

fix:

Just what is the Bernardin Legacy? Ask that simple question to any Catholic and the answers you receive will vary from one extreme to the other. One either loved him or despised him. But regardless of your personal opinion of the man there is one point, I believe, we can all agree on: He was a powerful and influential individual, both politically and spiritually. James Hitchcock wrote in an article published shortly after the Cardinal’s death that: “He [Bernardin] consistently used his influence to promote liberal causes, even attacks on Church teachings and traditions.” Hitchcock went on to say: “…he consistently used his power to build a network of allies within both the hierarchy and the bureaucracy, a network which in effect has controlled the direction of the ‘American Church’.”

Bernardin received the Presidential award from President Clinton and was honored, posthumously, by the Masons. He was a friend of Call To Action (CTA) and allowed them to operate on Church property. He even went so far as to speak out against Bishop Bruskewitz for excommunicating CTA members in his own diocese. History has taught us that the Cardinal usually came down on the liberal side of every issue, but what is his legacy? What about his faith?

As Catholics we know that our purpose in life is to know, love, and serve God, and as Archbishop of Chicago Bernardin had an even greater responsibility. Defending the faith and safeguarding the souls of the faithful was his job. How did he do? What was the condition of the Church in Chicago at the time of his passing, after 15 years of his leadership? That is his legacy.

Who did he live with? Who were his friends? (According to the 11/97 Washington Blade, a homosexual newspaper, the Cardinal himself had arranged for the *Windy City Gay Chorus *to sing at his wake at Holy Name Cathedral. It did so behind a sign prominently displaying its name.) What kinds of men did he associate with and help elevate to bishop? Who praised him? Who followed him and what was the result? RCF has spent the last four years looking for those answers…

rcf.org/docs/beginningoftheend.htm

I followed your link. I don’t know much about the group, though I liked most of what I read. I’m careful anymore about just accepting one groups slant or interpretation on a person. For example, on these boards, there are actually people who denounce Blessed John XXIII, of happy memory. Ya gotta be careful what ya believe, left and right.