Rev. Robert Drinan - Dead at 86

Rev. Robert Drinan, Ex-Congressman, Dies at 86 New York Times January 9, 2007.

In 1980 Pope John Paul II ordered Drinan to vacate his seat in Congress. In 1996 Drinan spoke out in favor of Bill Clinton's veto of the partial birth abortion ban. He also was an advisor on religious affairs to John Kerry during his 2004 presidential campaign. And in 2007 he was celebrant to a mass honoring Nancy Pelosi.

To quote Fr. Neuhaus, "a Jesuit who, more than any other single figure, has been influential in tutoring Catholic politicians on the acceptability of rejecting the Church’s teaching on the defense of innocent human life."

Bill Cork remarks:

Imagine what he could have done in politics in the 1970s if he had opposed abortion with the same vigor with which he opposed Republicans.

He now faces a more harsh tribunal than either the halls of Congress or the blogosphere.

God have mercy on his soul.

• The Strange Political Career of Father Drinan, by James Hitchcock. Catholic World News. January 9, 2002.
  

Cardinal Egan: Hillary, Pataki, Giuliani "friends of mine"

"Pro-Abort Politicians 'Friends of Mine' says New York Cardinal Egan", by Hilary White. LifeSiteNews.com January 26, 2006:

The NBC interviewer, David Ushery, asked for the Cardinal's response to the pro-abortion stance of three of the most prominent politicians in New York, presidential hopefuls Hillary Clinton and Rudolph Giuliani, and ex-governor of New York George Pataki.

Cardinal Egan responded, "They're all friends of mine."

"Governor Pataki's a friend of mine, Mayor Giuliani's a friend of mine, Senator Clinton is a friend of mine and whomever else you want to name."

The Cardinal added, "I think I'm a good friend of all three of these people, whom you've mentioned or whom I've mentioned. And I wish them all the best, and they've been very good to us. And I will vote, I assure you, right here in the New York, and that will be one vote. I won't ask you to vote the way I think you ought to vote."

Read The full transcript of the NBC interview, in which Cardinal Egan makes his case for abstaining from comment:

Cardinal EGAN: And Governor Pataki's a friend of mine, Mayor Giuliani's a friend of mine, Senator Clinton is a friend of mine and whomever else you want to name. And I've been very, very careful, I hope you notice. Never have I got into partisan politics of any kind at all. You know, I told you that we're going to be 200 years old.

USHERY: Right. And you're going to be preaching about that later today at the cathedral, and on Sunday.

Cardinal EGAN: Exactly. But if you go back to the first bishop we had, Bishop Carroll...

USHERY: Mm-hmm.

Cardinal EGAN: ...was the only bishop we had back in the 1800s, the early 1800s. He made it very clear that once he got himself into a political situation and years later he said how he regretted doing that, that his job was to preach the gospel, to celebrate the liturgy and to do the works of charity and justice. And I belive that John Carroll got it right. And so, no, don't ever expect me to be involved in partisan politics. I think I'm a good friend of all three of these people, whom you've mentioned or whom I've mentioned. And I wish them all the best, and they've been very good to us. And I will vote, I assure you, right here in the New York, and that will be one vote. I won't ask you to vote the way I think you ought to vote.

Giulian's record on abortion is pretty clear:

“I’m pro-choice. I’m pro-gay rights,” Giuliani said. He was then asked whether he supports a ban on what critics call partial-birth abortions. “No, I have not supported that, and I don’t see my position on that changing,” he responded. [Source: CNN.com, “Inside Politics” Dec 2, 1999].

He has been out of the public eye for a while, but it is doubtful as to whether he has reconsidered his position. Pataki's record is, well, mixed, and I think Senator Hillary Clinton's deplorable record on abortion and related issues needs no introduction.

Telling Catholics whom to vote for is one thing. I agree, for example, with CPS colleague Jay Anderson's reservations about Fr. Pavone formally joining Brownback's team. On the other hand, I think there are a good many faithful Catholic citizens of New York who would hope that Cardinal Egan, if given the opportunity to comment on the voting records of prospective presidential candidates, especially Catholic ones, would do something more than assert his personal friendship. Hence like Fr. Neuhaus' remark:

But of course [Egan] was making a statement of momentous political consequence, in that he seemed to be saying, as far as he is concerned, that the Church has no problem with pro-abortion politicians.

Roe v. Wade Must Be Destroyed

Cato would end every speech to his fellow Roman senators with the plea that "Carthage must be destroyed" ("Carthago delenda est"). Those many of us who find Roe v. Wade to be an evil and oppressive tyranny will also never tire of saying: Roe must be wiped out. By embracing the genocidal evil of abortion, the United States imported into the heart of its legal system the policies of Hitler, Stalin, and Saddam Hussein. The abortion tyranny imposed by a now discredited legal system was a unilateral surrender to all the ideologies of mass murder that marked the twentieth century, with the special twist that now the mass murder was justified as part of the "right" to casual sex.

One biblical commentator I read recently noted that we cannot view all distress that we suffer as punishment for sin (the Gospel story of Jesus and the man blind from birth and Jesus' commentary on those killed by a falling tower show that). But, on the other hand, the same commentator noted that we cannot automatically rule tragedy out as a punishment for sin. Catholics know or should know that sin, even if forgiven, carries temporal consequences. If sin is what is self-destructive to our humanity, then we should not be surprised if real and concrete destructive consequences follow when we mutilate our humanity. What the commentator sensibly called for was an examination of conscience in the face of tragedy and distress. The examination of conscience leaves open the question whether tragedy is a punishment for sin--but the question is there to be faced and answered one way or another.

If, as a nation, we do an examination of conscience today on the anniversary of the birth of the oppressive tyranny of Roe v. Wade, we can consider a distressing history that followed the infamous decision. In 1973, when the tyranny was born, the U.S. also lost its first war, ever, in Vietnam. The 1973 Vietnam Paris Peace Accords sealed the defeat. Shortly, thereafter, in 1974, the first U.S. President resigned from office to avoid impeachment. In the seventies, we went through our worst economic period since the Great Depression (remember "stagflation," that combination of high inflation and high unemployment?). We ended the seventies with the disastrous leadership of Jimmy Carter, who is still off-key and lost in his signature misguided way--most recently in his portrayal of Israel as a racist South Africa. We then entered the eighties with the renewed leadership of Ronald Reagan. But the social rot was in, even if there was finally a man of decisive character in the White House trying to bail us out: sexual shacking up became ever-present, bridal virginity rare, divorce almost inevitable, drug and other substance use continued to explode, all topped off with a giddy and tasteless consumerism and materialism fueled by obsessive status-seeking.

Then came the nineties with that persistent caricature of the confused baby boomer generation, Bill Clinton, who excelled in moral and political mediocrity, topped off with the Lewinsky fiasco (so graphically emblematic of the idolatry practiced by the devotees of casual sex); while Osama Bin Laden made his preliminary attacks in anticipation of 9/11. Yes, Nero fiddled; while Rome burned. We know what the Neronian Clinton did, while Osama planned and prepared. Clinton became only the second President impeached in American history (the only other was Andrew Johnson in the aftermath of the Civil War). Even Nixon had enough of a sense of honor to avoid that fate by resigning first. But, for many of the baby boomers, personal honor is an archaic leftover for the attic.

Finally, we have faced the attacks of Islamic fanatics under President George W. Bush, a president who is a baby boomer aberration: a committed Christian who is straightforward in taking the battle straight to the source of the evil threatening us. As to be expected, many of the rest of the baby boomer generation turned with venom and vitriol against this traitor to the moral confusion so openly pioneered by that generation. They have tried everything to bring him down, even seeking to promote an American defeat in the War on Islamic Terror.

A society that has enshrined mass murder in the heart of its legal system has made a mockery of the sacrifice made by so many in the wars against Nazism, Communism, and now Islamic imperialism. That consumption-addicted nation, bereft of honor in the most intimate relations of men and women, is burdened by the culture of selfish, mindless, and savage hedonism that gave us Roe v. Wade. That burden must be removed for us to flourish again. To update Cato, Roe v. Wade must be destroyed.

Archbishop Donald Wuerl: Helping Pelosi Get Away with Murder

LifeSiteNews' carries a disappointing story on the new Archbishop of Washington Donald Wuerl, who has decided to pursue a path of steadfast faithfulness to . . . . imitating the scandalous complacency of his predecessor Cardinal McCarrick towards "pro-choice Catholic" legislators. LifeSiteNews reports:

Perhaps it was a bad omen when at the installation Mass for the new Archbishop of Washington Donald Wuerl last June, pro-abortion Democratic Senator John Kerry was given Holy Communion and caught on camera in the act. During the entrance procession, Archbishop Wuerl shook hands with Kerry and Senator Ted Kennedy. (see coverage)

Now, Archbishop Wuerl, who replaced Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, has said publicly that he would not discipline or direct priests to deny communion to pro-abortion Catholic politician Nancy Pelosi who was just made speaker of the House of Representatives.

When California Catholic Daily reporter Allyson Smith inquired during an interview as to whether Wuerl planned to "discipline her at all for being persistent and obstinate about supporting abortion and same-sex marriage," Wuerl responded, "I will not be using the faculty in that, in the manner you have described."

See also Amy Welborn's extensive coverage of the Pelosi / Wuerl scandal, in which she comments:

I think what Archbishop Wuerl and others fail to understand is the impact of things like this on the lay Catholic who is struggling to be a faithful disciple in the world. The message that is sent by silence is strong, in terms of the lay apostolate in the world, in terms of the unity of faith and life.

Nancy Pelosi is not "struggling" with the Church's teaching on abortion, trying to work for the protection of unborn human beings within the constraints of the current U.S. law. As we noted before, she is unapologetically, strongly supportive of abortion-rights and unborn children don't even enter into her radar (publicly, at least) as human beings. . . .

But resting on Archbishop Wuerl's statements alone, which do not indicate that there's anything problematic about Nancy Pelosi's way of living a Catholic life, and which, I admit, simply might be an expression of a reticent style that only answers the questions posed, I'll just say this again.

If this woman, engaged in a public role, very publicly works against the teachings of the Church to which she professes a very public tie isn't publicly challenged by even one of the primary teachers of the Church - the bishops - the rest of us - lay Catholics, living and working in the world, every day facing decisions on how to be faithful disciples of Jesus in the midst of the complexities of our professions, some of us who really suffer because of the things they refuse to do because of their fidelity to Christ - we get a message.

And the message we get is that - it doesn't matter. Do whatever you want.

* * *

Note to Archbishop Wuerl -- here's an excerpt from a noteworthy memo from then-Cardinal Ratzinger to your predecessor ("Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion — General Principles" L'espresso, June 2004):

. . . Regarding the grave sin of abortion or euthanasia, when a person’s formal cooperation becomes manifest (understood, in the case of a Catholic politician, as his consistently campaigning and voting for permissive abortion and euthanasia laws), his Pastor should meet with him, instructing him about the Church’s teaching, informing him that he is not to present himself for Holy Communion until he brings to an end the objective situation of sin, and warning him that he will otherwise be denied the Eucharist.

When “these precautionary measures have not had their effect or in which they were not possible,” and the person in question, with obstinate persistence, still presents himself to receive the Holy Eucharist, “the minister of Holy Communion must refuse to distribute it” (cf. Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts Declaration “Holy Communion and Divorced, Civilly Remarried Catholics” [2002], nos. 3-4). This decision, properly speaking, is not a sanction or a penalty. Nor is the minister of Holy Communion passing judgement on the person’s subjective guilt, but rather is reacting to the person’s public unworthiness to receive Holy Communion due to an objective situation of sin.

Earlier this month, The National Abortion Rights Action League commended self-styled "Catholic grandmother" Nancy Pelosi for championing "pro-choice values" for nearly 20 years -- a pretty consistent -- or obstinant -- record on abortion, wouldn't you agree?

* * *Observing the complacency of the bishops to discipline Michael Liccione wonders What is our problem?:

People being what they are, there must be a measure of "organization"—buildings, offices, procedures, finances, programs, and the like—if the Church is to do her work. But after a certain point, the instinct for institutional self-preservation outweighs the desire for evangelical credibility.

Beneath all the legalistic mumbo-jumbo about bishops' rights to differing "pastoral styles," this is why learned, doctrinally orthodox bishops such as Wuerl allow Catholics in public life who facilitate abortion, gay marriage, and embryonic-stem-cell research to remain in ostensibly "full communion" with the Church. Beneath the facile and fallacious clichés about "conscience," this is why most bishops would discipline a priest under them who started denying the Eucharist to parishioners aware of, but staunchly unwilling to abide by, the Church's teaching on contraception. Some of those bishops are ones who for too long failed to discipline child molesters and remained in denial about that problem; the reasons for each policy are closely related. Beneath the apparently flexibility and sophistication of "the internal forum," this is why many so many priests incorporate, as a matter of course, divorced people who have remarried without annulment into parish life on the same level as other Catholics who have adhered, at great cost to themselves, to Church teaching on the indissolubility of marriage. For the most part, the hierarchy are terrified that schisms, be they de facto or de jure, would reduce the Church to institutional rubble. And let's be clear: such rubble is exactly what would we'd get if they got serious about challenging people to follow Christ in the pelvic area.

* * *At least one reader of Deal W. Hudson is contemplating civil disobedience in the event of witnessing another "pro-choice Catholic" profane the Eucharist:

If these "Catholic" politicians keep persisting in walking up the communion aisle, why can't the communicants in their seats stand up and stop them by merely standing in their way much like that young man in Tiannamen Square before the tanks?

Nancy Pelosi and Company have run over innocent life long enough.

* * *

Lastly, Fr. Neuhaus on "ambivalence and resolve about Roe (First Things' "On the Square" - January 19th, 2006):

When the aforementioned Nancy Pelosi orchestrated a four-day gala in Washington celebrating her familial, ethnic, and—very explicitly—Catholic identity, people were alert to what would be said by the new archbishop of Washington, Donald Wuerl. He said nothing. Part of the festivities was a Mass at Trinity College, a Catholic institution in Washington. The celebrant of the Mass was Father Robert Drinan, a Jesuit who, more than any other single figure, has been influential in tutoring Catholic politicians on the acceptability of rejecting the Church’s teaching on the defense of innocent human life. Asked by a reporter, Archbishop Wuerl responded that Fr. Drinan has “faculties” in Washington, meaning he is authorized to celebrate the sacraments. That was it.

Also recently, Edward Cardinal Egan of New York gave a rare television interview in which he was persistently asked whether the pro-abortion position of Catholic politicians, notably Rudolph Giuliani and outgoing governor George Pataki, posed a problem for him. He just as persistently said he refused to be drawn into politics and answered, “They are my friends.” But of course he was making a statement of momentous political consequence, in that he seemed to be saying, as far as he is concerned, that the Church has no problem with pro-abortion politicians. It is understandable that Catholics and others have drawn the conclusion that, for both Wuerl and Egan, bishops of the two most prominent sees in the country, rejecting the Church’s teaching on the human dignity of the unborn child is not a big deal.

Related "Must Read" Posts:

• A father’s responsibility to his children, by Domenico Bettinelli.
  

• Barbara Kralis issus A plea to the Pope for help and encourages a letter-writing campaign on the part of outraged Catholic laity.
  

Anticipating the 2008 Presidential Race . . .

• Hillary's in the race (suprise, suprise). I would comment further, but Thomistic at Roman Catholic Blog has an excellent post.
  

• Fr. Pavone has officially joined Senator Brownback's presidential team. I agree with fellow editor Jay Anderson -- much as I like the idea of Brownback as a Catholic candidate, I'm not at all enthused about a Catholic priest taking such a formal position on his team. I'm more comfortable with members of our clergy providing the laity with a clear articulation of the Catholic principles which should govern our choice of candidates.
  

• On a related note, Closed Cafeteria reports that Father Michael Pfleger is stumping for pro-abort Sen. Obama, calling him "the best thing that has come across the political scene since Bobby Kennedy."
  

It's only the beginning, folks.

"Pro Choice Catholic" Pelosi - A New Challenge to the Church

• Didn't Take Long, by Deal W. Hudson:

  I guess it didn't take long for the dichotomy between Speaker Pelosi's professed Catholicism and her Liberal politics to rear its ugly head. A key legislative initiative she plans to tackle during the Democrats "first 100 hours" is to expand embryonic stem cell research. According to a press release from Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, this vote is scheduled for next Thursday, January 11.

  
  
• Pelosi gets her "celebration tour" Mass, despite pro-life resistance - Thomas Peters (American Papist) relays news from Philadelphia's The Evening Bulletin:

  Despite the appeals from a conservative pro-life group to prevent Speaker of the House-elect Nancy Pelosi from making a political appearance at a Mass at Trinity Washington College, Archbishop

  Donald Wuerl permitted the pro-abortion Democrat to use the Mass as a centerpiece of her "celebration" tour.

  More reaction from Judie Brown of the American Life League: Pro-Abortion Pelosi Insults Catholic Faith Human Events Online January 2, 2007. Mrs. Brown was a strong voice in the 2004 presidential elections, calling Cardinal McCarrick and other bishops to task for their lukewarm treatment of "pro-choice Catholic" candidate Senator John Kerry.
  

• Nancy-Palooza - good coverage of Pelosi's self-congratulatory promotional tour @ Amy Welborn's Open Book, in which is provided Nancy Pelosi's Record on Abortion. Amy questions:

  Will the leadership of the Roman Catholic Church let itself be played? Will it allow Nancy Pelosi to "celebrate" her Catholic roots as an act of obvious, frank political manipulation to get ethnic Catholics to start thinking Democrat again? Or will the leadership of this Church swallow its instinctive institutional self-protectiveness and pride, consider the spectacle of a Catholic who has achieved a position of political power, trumpets her Catholic identity, but is viciously indifferent to the plight of the weakest and most helpless in our society and say...Hmmm. Something wrong here. Maybe we should...do something? Maybe?

  Must-read post.
  

• Which leads the Curt Jester to wonder if the new Speaker for the House suffered a concussion as a result of her crashing through the marble ceiling.
  

Like the 2004 presidential campaign of Senator Kerry, the term of Speaker Pelosi provides Catholics with a brand new challenge. In the words of Deal Hudson:

As I read through the postings of the past few days and caught up on recent news after my long winter's nap, I was suddenly struck with a feeling of deja vu all over again, as Yogi Berra would say. . . .

What rang familiar to me was like presidential candidate John Kerry, we now have one of the highest ranking U.S. officials -- the third person in succession for the presidency behind the president and vice president -- who claims to be Catholic while ardently supporting a pro-abortion, pro-homosexual agenda. And like the Kerry presidential run, the Church will have a tremendous opportunity to remind her and the nation how dramatically contrary this agenda is to the Catholic's primordial teachings on life and family.

Elizabeth Fox Genovese 1941-2007

Elizabeth Fox Genovese died on January 2nd, at the age of 65. The blog Cosmos Liturgy Sex provides a welcome roundup of memories and tributes - In Memory of Elizabeth Fox-Genovese: Secular, Liberal to Pro-life Feminist:

Elizabeth began her career as an atheist, feminist scholar but her sharp mind and open heart soon led her to the truth about abortion and eventually to her conversion to the Catholic Faith. She was an active member of the Fellowship of Catholic Scholars, a recognized expert in the history of the American South, and a critic of radical feminism.

Elizabeth offered some reflections on her conversion in a Crisis 2002 magazine article, The Way of Conversion:

What I believe I can say with some confidence, but without pride, is that conversion never stops. Each day, each of us faces fresh challenges to live and act and speak in fidelity to the gospel, and none of them is easy.

But of this we may be sure: If we back away from all of them and retreat into the comfort of the prevailing consensus, we will lose the substance of our conversion. It is common to see the convert as the prodigal son of Jesus' parable and, I suspect, no less common for faithful Catholics, including converts, to identify with the older son, for whom no fatted calf is killed. In slipping into that view of ourselves as having been converted-having attained a status-we lose sight of the parable's deeper meaning: namely, that we always remain the prodigal son and always remain in need of the Father's unqualified welcome.

Catholics in the 110th Congress

Jay links to an article below which points out the large number of Catholic in the 110th Congress. A run down of the numbers:

157 Roman Catholics.

In the House of Representatives: total of 132, 19 freshmen, 43 Republicans and 89 Democrats.

In the Senate: a total of 25, with 2 freshmen, 9 Republicans, 16 Democrats.

5 Eastern Orthodox Catholics

In the House of Representatives: a total of 4, 3 freshmen, 1 Republican and 3 Democrats.

In the Senate: only one, Republican Sen Olympia Snowe of Maine.

A list of all the Catholics in Congress can be found here.

Difficulties Facing "Pro-Life" Democrats

Columnist Robert Novak writes on the difficulties facing "pro-life" Democrats in Congress as the new Democrat majority plans to push such agenda items as embryonic stem-cell research:

Near the top of the new Democratic congressional majority's agenda is passage of federal embryonic stem cell research legislation vetoed last year by President Bush, a measure that will answer a major question. There is no doubt the new bill will pass both houses of Congress. What remains in doubt are the votes to be cast by newly elected Democrats who campaigned as pro-life advocates, particularly Sen. Bob Casey Jr.

***
This is the arithmetic in the Senate, where a vetoed bill will go first. It would take 33 senators to sustain a Bush veto, if ailing Democratic Sen. Tim Johnson (S.D.) is unable to vote. Of the 36 Republicans who voted against the Castle bill, five were defeated for re-election: Santorum, George Allen in Virginia, Conrad Burns in Montana, Mike DeWine in Ohio and James Talent in Missouri. Sen. Ben Nelson (Neb.) was the only Senate Democrat who voted no last year, and that means one more Democrat would be needed this year. Casey's vote could be central.

The House sustained last year's veto by a 50-vote margin. Thirteen of those members were defeated in November. So, even if there are Republican defections, the burden will not fall on seven avowedly pro-life Democrats newly elected to the House: Heath Shuler (N.C.), Charlie Wilson (Ohio), Joe Donnelly (Ind.), Brad Ellsworth (Ind.), Baron Hill (Ind.), Jason Altmire (Pa.) and Chris Carney (Pa.).

With Speaker Nancy Pelosi putting this legislation on her 100-hour list, these pro-life House Democrats, nevertheless, will be under intense pressure, as will Nelson, Sen. Jon Tester, a pro-lifer who defeated Burns in Montana last year, and Bobby Casey.

Meanwhile, Reuters reports that "Roman Catholics are the largest single U.S. religious denomination among members of the new U.S. Congress".

Led, of course, by newly elected Speaker of the House and "conservative Catholic", Nancy Pelosi.

Catholic Congressional Scorecard

My apologies for my extended absence from CPS. I am once again a student and find it hard to also be a father, husband, and blogger. I did spend some of the Christmas break creating a Catholic Congressional Scorecard for the 109th Congress. It focuses on eight non-negotiable issues for Catholics—abortion, ESCR, human cloning, marriage, euthanasia, torture, conscience protection, and contraception. Each of these issues was addressed during the 109th Congress, both in the Senate and House of Representatives. There were either votes on specific legislation or amendments and/or sponsorship of proposed legislation for each of the eight issues. These votes and sponsorship status for each individual senator and representative is presented in the scorecard. Unlike other congressional scorecards, there is no ranking of senators and representatives. This was not an effort to determine which members of Congress are more Catholics than others. The data is presented for all citizens, esp. Catholics, to see the actions of their individual senators and representatives on these very important issues and either applaud their actions or petition them to change them. It is my impression that the 110th Congress will see similar pieces of legislation as listed on the scorecard as well as new legislation to undo others.

The scorecard can be accessed here.