Special request from US Bishops!

[zab]

Not my style of spirituality, I guess. Everyone to their own. Cheers!

So now we get to the heart of the matter. The bishops are asking us to pray the rosary and your response here is, “Not my style of spirituality, I guess.”

 

[Ender]

I for one, voted FOR what I feel the Pope was for. Every time the US Catholic Bishops stood up about voting Republican… (that’s what it was… really)… the Pope would come out in a public statement about “feeding the hungry, and clothing the naked” etc.

This idea is expressed repeatedly but despite the fact that it is somewhat widely believed it still represents a rather massive misunderstanding of what is and is not taught by the Church.

When a bishop says that a politician who supports an intrinsic evil like abortion should not be supported he is making a moral statement, not a political one. It is about good and evil, not Republicans and Democrats. When the pope says we need to care for the poor this is again a moral rather than a political statement in that it identifies the goals we should set. What it does not do is specify the means we should use to attain those goals. In the first example we can readily identify which candidates support evil but in the second case the disagreements between the parties are not about the ends but about the means that will best achieve them, and on that point the Church is silent. It may be personally comforting to claim that the pope supports Democrat policies but in fact that claim is as empty as believing he personally approves of their table manners.

There is no justification for believing Democrats care for the poor and Republicans don’t and even less reason for believing the pope would agree with such a rash and uncharitable judgment. The determination of policy is a lay obligation, despite the fact that numerous bishops over indulge their inclinations to become involved in political controversies, and while some policies will surely have better or worse outcomes those are not moral choices and the Church neither confirms nor condemns them.

That is the difference between issues dealing with practical considerations and issues of intrinsic moral evil. It is in the latter cases only where we are faced with moral choices.

Ender

 

[fix]

earlier in this thread, someone said that they wondered why more Catholics voted for Obama. Was it that they were voting for abortion? Against Repubican immigration policy? For peace vs war? Well, I for one, voted FOR what I feel the Pope was for. Every time the US Catholic Bishops stood up about voting Republican… (that’s what it was… really)… the Pope would come out in a public statement about “feeding the hungry, and clothing the naked” etc. He couldn’t publicly slap them down, but he almost did. Then he went all out in a GRACIOUS congrats to Barack Obama for winning the election. If he thought it was so evil… why didn’t he just go silent? You HHS folk don’t realize that he is the Pope of the WORLD. Would he not have to go out and tell Canadians, Europeans… etc to stop paying taxes that fund abortion if he told US to refuse to elect Obama based on HHS? Really… have you considered that? He’d be a hypocrite not to level the playing field. One standard for us… and another for the rest of the world?

Such confusion. Do you think the Pope does not understand moral theology?

 

[iloveangels]

So now we get to the heart of the matter. The bishops are asking us to pray the rosary and your response here is, “Not my style of spirituality, I guess.”

The rosary is one of many Catholic prayer types. It’s not everyone’s favorite prayer type.

This idea is expressed repeatedly but despite the fact that it is somewhat widely believed it still represents a rather massive misunderstanding of what is and is not taught by the Church.

When a bishop says that a politician who supports an intrinsic evil like abortion should not be supported he is making a moral statement, not a political one. It is about good and evil, not Republicans and Democrats. When the pope says we need to care for the poor this is again a moral rather than a political statement in that it identifies the goals we should set. What it does not do is specify the means we should use to attain those goals. In the first example we can readily identify which candidates support evil but in the second case the disagreements between the parties are not about the ends but about the means that will best achieve them, and on that point the Church is silent. It may be personally comforting to claim that the pope supports Democrat policies but in fact that claim is as empty as believing he personally approves of their table manners.

There is no justification for believing Democrats care for the poor and Republicans don’t and even less reason for believing the pope would agree with such a rash and uncharitable judgment. The determination of policy is a lay obligation, despite the fact that numerous bishops over indulge their inclinations to become involved in political controversies, and while some policies will surely have better or worse outcomes those are not moral choices and the Church neither confirms nor condemns them.

That is the difference between issues dealing with practical considerations and issues of intrinsic moral evil. It is in the latter cases only where we are faced with moral choices.

Ender

I absolutely agree with you, Ender. Very good observations. This is spot on.

 

[iloveangels]

The thing is, the bishops were messing in American politics. And when they least expected it, they were double-crossed. Why? Because they walked right into it. There were people who were waiting for them to make the mistake they did.

So, the USCCB response was to throw out a bunch of big statements, and they’re being called on the carpet over those statements now. I have no idea what they’re going to do, and I’m not sure they do either. Now, they have a big mess on their hands–not only the things that they can control but a lot of stuff that they can’t control, including a lot of historical stuff.

The USCCB has got to get out of politics and tend to the religious well-being of Catholics, and the sooner the better.

 

[JimG]

In the meantime, the Little Sisters of the Poor will likely be forced out of the United States because of the HHS mandate, and they are entirely apolitical. They are simply being penalized for their Catholicism.

catholicvote.org/discuss/index.php?p=39378

 

[iloveangels]

In the meantime, the Little Sisters of the Poor will likely be forced out of the United States because of the HHS mandate, and they are entirely apolitical. They are simply being penalized for their Catholicism.

catholicvote.org/discuss/index.php?p=39378

They’re casualties of the rest of the system which was being mis-managed. It’s sad but you can’t behave this way and think you can get away with it indefinitely. Sooner or later, if something this size is mismanaged, it hits a wall. We’re there.

It’s simply not possible to try to impose Catholic moral teaching on the other 75% of the country, when you can’t even get half or more of Catholics to accept it. What they have to do now is be honest, get a plan and turn this around from the ground up. It’s a huge job and, given the deeply ingrained habits out there, I don’t know how they’re going to do it.

Also they’re going to have to get a firewall against further very real damage from other impending and very serious issues, like the gay marriage thing. That’s going to have to be a prudential firewall, done with practice and policy to decrease the likelihood of real damage. I don’t know if they can bring themselves to do it. It won’t imperil any real doctrinal teachings – the things we need to do are already being done in Europe on a large scale – but it will threaten “pet notions.”

This isn’t over. There are very powerful people who were just messing with us before, but now they smell blood in the water.

 

[JimG]

Of course it isn’t over. But the Little Sisters of the Poor aren’t trying to impose Catholic moral teaching on anybody. They’re just trying to serve the elderly poor, doing it without public funding, while remaining faithful Catholics.

The HHS mandate makes it impossible for them to do that. I don’t see why all Catholic institutions should be forced out of business merely because they are Catholic. Your posts seem to blame Catholics for not being faithful. But why is the unfaithfulness of Catholics a reason to force Catholic institutions and business owners out of business? It doesn’t make sense.

The Little Sisters of the Poor are practicing their charism. It is not the business of government to tell them what their charism must be, or to tell them that it’s okay to pray for the elderly but not to actually help them.

 

[JimG]

I agree that the push for gay marriage is going to adversely affect the Church too. Not only the Church, but all Christians, and all of society. It will force all persons to accept the fantasy of gay marriage as if it were a reality, and that will not be good for anyone. I suspect it will lead to civil penalties, just like the HHS mandate.

 

[iloveangels]

I agree that the push for gay marriage is going to adversely affect the Church too. Not only the Church, but all Christians, and all of society. It will force all persons to accept the fantasy of gay marriage as if it were a reality, and that will not be good for anyone. I suspect it will lead to civil penalties, just like the HHS mandate.

You’re not getting my point, Jim. There are things that the Church needs to do to prevent the damage. It can do these things if Catholics wake up and get going.

 

[iloveangels]

Of course it isn’t over. But the Little Sisters of the Poor aren’t trying to impose Catholic moral teaching on anybody. They’re just trying to serve the elderly poor, doing it without public funding, while remaining faithful Catholics.

Unfortunately, that congregation may end up being a casualty of the mess we’ve gotten ourselves into. We’ll see.

The HHS mandate makes it impossible for them to do that. I don’t see why all Catholic institutions should be forced out of business merely because they are Catholic. Your posts seem to blame Catholics for not being faithful. But why is the unfaithfulness of Catholics a reason to force Catholic institutions and business owners out of business? It doesn’t make sense.

It makes perfect sense. This is how things work. When people aren’t responsible about their actions, they pay for them. Catholics have lusted after mainstream status at the expense of everything else. Well, now they have it. But they paid a price, the predictable price.

The Little Sisters of the Poor are practicing their charism. It is not the business of government to tell them what their charism must be, or to tell them that it’s okay to pray for the elderly but not to actually help them.

The Catholic Church doesn’t have much political or social capital left in this society. We’ve used it all up. We burnt through it like a bonfire in 2001-2002, and we’re burning through it now, trying to dictate to the general population – who aren’t even Catholic (!) – how we think they should live. We’re not subtle about it; we’re not convincing; we can’t even get Catholics to live this way, and yet we are telling them? They don’t believe us. Why should they?

Therefore we no longer have enough political & social capital to support things like these little religious orders, until we fix the problems we have. Why is this so hard for you to understand?

 

[JimG]

You’re not getting my point, Jim. There are things that the Church needs to do to prevent the damage. It can do these things if Catholics wake up and get going.

Maybe there are things the Church can do to prevent the damage. That depends on a large extent to whether the government wishes to force its will on Catholics.

If we were in China, joining the National Catholic Patriotic Association would prevent the damage; but it would also involve rejecting the authority and the mission of the Church.

 

[iloveangels]

Maybe there are things the Church can do to prevent the damage. That depends on a large extent to whether the government wishes to force its will on Catholics.

NO, it depends on whether we’re going to sit around whining and carrying on with the general public about how they live, when we live just like they do. We have to take prudential measures 1) to make sure that certain rather predictable things don’t happen, and then 2) we need to start educating Catholics like mad, the sooner the better.

If we were in China, joining the National Catholic Patriotic Association would prevent the damage; but it would also involve rejecting the authority and the mission of the Church.

Whine, whine, whine.

I’ll tell you what scares me the most. It’s that the USCCB might be bluffing and short of a few token adjustments, they don’t do anything, hoping that we’re all stupid and nobody will notice. That possibility scares me beyond everything else. THEN it will really get bad because they’re beyond being able to get away with this. Because you have to know this is not over.

 

[JimG]

NO, it depends on whether we’re going to sit around whining and carrying on with the general public about how they live, when we live just like they do. We have to take prudential measures 1) to make sure that certain rather predictable things don’t happen, and then 2) we need to start educating Catholics like mad, the sooner the better.

Whine, whine, whine.

I’ll tell you what scares me the most. It’s that the USCCB might be bluffing and short of a few token adjustments, they don’t do anything, hoping that we’re all stupid and nobody will notice. That possibility scares me beyond everything else. THEN it will really get bad because they’re beyond being able to get away with this. Because you have to know this is not over.

Well, yes, that concerns me too. I’d hate to see the USCCB fight the mandate only to cave in to it.

Not that I don’t think they shouldn’t try to work out something that will be acceptable–because a lot of people will get hurt–including non-Catholics–if Catholic institutions close.

But I don’t want them to compromise on Catholic morality. That would simply be caving in to the mandate, and that should not be an option.

Ultimately, each bishop is in charge of his own diocese. The USCCB can’t mandate what each bishop does in response to the HHS mandate. It will be up to individual bishops to decide what to do. And not just individual bishops, but individual institutions and business owners.

I don’t advocate getting ot of all these businesses. I think that Catholics should be involved in helping the poor and elderly, feeding the hungry, tending to the homeless, and I see no reason why it cannot be an institutional effort as well as an individual effort. But the government has the power to force them out of doing the corporal works of mercy on a corporate basis. That’s the power of the HHS Secretary, and it really isn’t limited to her. Other federal agencies and federal regulations can also force Catholics to bend to the government’s will.

 

[iloveangels]

Well, yes, that concerns me too. I’d hate to see the USCCB fight the mandate only to cave in to it.
Not that I don’t think they shouldn’t try to work out something that will be acceptable–because a lot of people will get hurt–including non-Catholics–if Catholic institutions close.
But I don’t want them to compromise on Catholic morality. That would simply be caving in to the mandate, and that should not be an option.

I don’t know what they might be able to come up with that would be acceptable to Catholics that the administration would accept, given the people the administration is allied with. They’re trying to a) keep everyone in the same system, b) keep everything the same from institution to institution, and c) keep their donors and power brokers happy, and d) retain the same crowd of voters they had last time. And you know what that crowd of voters likes.

Ultimately, each bishop is in charge of his own diocese.

This is true.

The USCCB can’t mandate what each bishop does in response to the HHS mandate. It will be up to individual bishops to decide what to do. And not just individual bishops, but individual institutions and business owners.

True. Some of them will have harder decisions to make, and some of their decisions will matter more than others. But know: Information is very freely available now, and if we want to be believed, we have to be believable.

I don’t advocate getting ot of all these businesses. I think that Catholics should be involved in helping the poor and elderly, feeding the hungry, tending to the homeless, and I see no reason why it cannot be an institutional effort as well as an individual effort. But the government has the power to force them out of doing the corporal works of mercy on a corporate basis. That’s the power of the HHS Secretary, and it really isn’t limited to her. Other federal agencies and federal regulations can also force Catholics to bend to the government’s will.

I absolutely think that we can’t do some things anymore until we fix our own problems. It’s not only not optional; I don’t even think it’s even possible to do what we have been doing anymore, under current conditions.

We’ve spent all the political and cultural capital we had. The culture doesn’t believe us Catholics anymore. And who can blame them? Half of us Catholics don’t even believe us Catholics anymore. We have to fix that.

Jim, what I hear you saying is that you want your cake and you want to eat it too. That’s no longer possible. It’s just not available to us anymore without a very high cost, which will carry an even higher price tag, and so on and so on. We cannot go there.

 

[JimG]

I don’t know what they might be able to come up with that would be acceptable to Catholics that the administration would accept, given the people the administration is allied with. They’re trying to a) keep everyone in the same system, b) keep everything the same from institution to institution, and c) keep their donors and power brokers happy, and d) retain the same crowd of voters they had last time. And you know what that crowd of voters likes.

This is true.
True. Some of them will have harder decisions to make, and some of their decisions will matter more than others. But know: Information is very freely available now, and if we want to be believed, we have to be believable.

I absolutely think that we can’t do some things anymore until we fix our own problems. It’s not only not optional; I don’t even think it’s even possible to do what we have been doing anymore, under current conditions.

We’ve spent all the political and cultural capital we had. The culture doesn’t believe us Catholics anymore. And who can blame them? Half of us Catholics don’t even believe us Catholics anymore. We have to fix that.

If we have to close Catholic institutions, it won’t have anything to do with fixing our own problems. Fixing our own problems will not affect the HHS mandate one whit.

 

[iloveangels]

If we have to close Catholic institutions, it won’t have anything to do with fixing our own problems. Fixing our own problems will not affect the HHS mandate one whit.

It may be too late to do anything about the HHS mandate, yes. Barring miraculous negotiations, either the USCCB will cave on this or things will close, one or the other. And yes, I think it will be a strange mosaic of stuff that happens in the Church, but we will see. The big stuff is going to cease being Catholic, I think, barring that miraculous negotiation. Whether the bishops call them on it and force them to change the sign out front will be interesting to see. If they do, then they stood up for the Church. If they don’t, then they caved.

The next time this happens, we do not want to be in the same awful situation, and we do not want to be double-crossed again. This means we have got to clean up our act and reduce our vulnerability. There will be a next time. We’ve probably more than guaranteed that by our behavior.

 

[iloveangels]

You must understand the entire situation, Jim. It’s very hard to make the case that the USCCB “will not comply” when the following is already true and has been for some years – because of sloppy relationships between the bishops and these institutions and because of faulty catechesis:

Catholic Groups Fight Contraceptive Rule, But Many Already Offer Coverage
npr.org/blogs/health/2011/12/02/143022996/catholic-groups-fight-contraceptive-rule-but-many-already-offer-coverage

We have to fix this.

And this: content.usatoday.com/communities/Religion/post/2012/02/contraception-catholic-bishops-obama-hhs/1#.UM_FVKzmKSo

IF they stand by their word, and I hope they do, they will not only refuse to take the next step forward into allowing things they didn’t before (even wider availability of contraception & abortion coverage). They will be disallowing things that they have been allowing.

 

[HansTrappist]

The USCCB has got to get out of politics and tend to the religious well-being of Catholics, and the sooner the better.

Politics is simply History in realtime. The Bishops are not going to be departing from History anytime soon.

I think you have it exactly backwards. It is time for the Bishops to get MORE involved in politics. That they had not engaged in politics as much as they should have: that was the problem.

The Bishops have the teaching charism. There is nothing the prince of this world fears more than a Bishop exercising his teaching authority. It sows “division.” It separates the wheat from the chaff.

 

[iloveangels]

Politics is simply History in realtime. The Bishops are not going to be departing from History anytime soon.

I think you have it exactly backwards. It is time for the Bishops to get MORE involved in politics. That they had not engaged in politics as much as they should have: that was the problem.

The Bishops have the teaching charism. There is nothing the prince of this world fears more than a Bishop exercising his teaching authority. It sows “division.” It separates the wheat from the chaff.

Then get ready to be unhappy, because well over 75% of the people in this country are not Catholic, and Catholics are going to get curb-kicked until they learn what it means to have a religion and follow it without trying to impose it on other people against their wills. If Catholics continue to provoke them over moral issues that they don’t even obey, the general public is going to react.