U.S. Bishops Agree to Collaborate on Anti-War Strategy With Same Catholic Dems Who Slammed Pope on Abortion

A couple of weeks ago, Catholic Congressional Democrats wrote to the USCCB asking for a meeting to discuss anti-war strategy. The Bishops have now replied with an acceptance of the offer to meet and strategize with the Catholic Democrats. From the USCCB Office of Media Relations:

WASHINGTON (July 18, 2007) — The U.S. bishops have agreed to meet with a group of Catholic House Democrats to discuss a “responsible transition” to end the war in Iraq. The bishops also reiterated their call for members of Congress and the Administration to break the political stalemate in Washington and to pursue a bipartisan policy to end the war as soon as possible.

The call was noted in a letter from Bishop Thomas G. Wenski of Orlando, Florida, chairman of the bishops’ Committee on International Policy, in response to a June 28 request for a meeting on Iraq from Rep. Tim Ryan (D/Ohio) and 13 other House Democrats.

“Our Conference hopes to work with the Congress and the Administration to forge bipartisan policies on ways to bring about a responsible transition and an end to the war,” Bishop Wenski said in a July 17 letter. He pointed to numerous church statements that the bishops have made about the Iraqi situation.

“Too many Iraqi and American lives have been lost. Too many Iraqi communities have been shattered. Too many civilians have been driven from their homes. The human and financial costs of the war are staggering. Representatives of our Conference welcome the opportunity to meet with you and other policy makers to discuss ways to pursue the goal of a ‘responsible transition’ to bring an end to the war in Iraq,” Bishop Wenski said.

“The current situation in Iraq is unacceptable and unsustainable, as is the policy and political stalemate among decision makers in Washington,” Bishop Wenski said.

“Our shared moral tradition can guide this effort and inform our dialogue with other leaders as we seek a way to bring about a morally responsible end to the war in Iraq,” he added.

The letter follows.

[More]

My Comments:
This raises a couple of issues regarding consistency. In short, I'm waiting for 2 unlikely things to occur:

(1) For howls of outrage from the usual (liberal) suspects regarding the Church involving itself in the political process, and regarding one of the major political parties trying to "co-opt" the Church for its own ends; and

(2) For the Bishops to similarly meet with pro-life Republicans in Congress and the Bush Administration to strategize on anti-abortion policy.

Diogenes also notices the same incongruency, and offers his take:

"Our shared moral tradition..."

Leaders of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops have agreed to meet with a group of 14 Democratic lawmakers to discuss how they might work together to end US military involvement in Iraq. In fact the USCCB has already done its little bit by issuing a press release to call attention to the Democratic legislators' cause.

Who are these Democratic politicians, who find such a ready audience at the USCCB? They're Catholic members of the House of Representatives. And half of them-- including Rep. Tim Ryan, who is leading the charge on Iraq-- also signed a May public statement scolding Pope Benedict XVI for daring to say that Catholic politicians should oppose the legalized killing of unborn children.

The Pope's comments on the political responsibilities of Catholic legislators, these Catholic legislators said in May, "offend the very nature of the American experiment." But now they're soliciting the political involvement of the American bishops.

A practical politician might have told these 14 Democrats that if they don't want to hear from the Catholic Church about abortion, they shouldn't look to hear from the Church about the war in Iraq. A concerned pastor might have told them that if they disregard the Church's teaching on a clear issue of moral teaching, they should not be so hypocritical as to invoke Church teaching on an issue that is not nearly so clear-- an issue on which loyal Catholics can and do differ. But the USCCB leaders didn't choose those options. Instead the USCCB implicitly accepted the lawmakers' claim that they are the moral champions of Catholic teaching.

No, wait; it wasn't an implicit acceptance; it was quite explicit. Bishop Thomas Wenski concluded his letter to Congressman Ryan by saying: "Our shared moral tradition can guide this effort and inform our dialogue with other leaders as we seek a way to bring about a morally responsible end to the war in Iraq."

Back in May, 7 of these same politicians argued, in their highly public rebuke to the Pope: "Advancing respect for life and for the dignity of every human being is, as our Church has taught us, our own life's mission." Thus they claimed that their political views-- including their support for legal abortion-- are formed by their Catholic faith. When Bishop Wenski writes to them about "Our shared moral tradition," he reinforces that claim.

There are plenty of reasons to work for peace in Iraq; that's not the issue here. But responsible public leaders of the Catholic Church should not claim to share a moral tradition with politicians who support the slaughter of the unborn.

(emphasis added)

Exactly.

Third Edition of "Unpopular Catholic Truths" Now Available

The third edition of my book Unpopular Catholic Truths is now available for $9.50 at Lulu.com publishers at this link. A free preview is available at the publisher site. The link is also in the side margin of the Catholic Analysis blog. The third edition includes an essay on the Pope's book Salt of the Earth, which he wrote as Cardinal Ratzinger. The long section on abortion will be relevant to the upcoming 2008 election.

Although in the past I have called it an apologetics book, I really don't view myself as an apologist. Most apologetic writings I have seen focus on trying to disprove specific arguments by non-Catholics and so have a defensive tone or an excessively polemical and argumentative approach. My own approach is not so much to disprove what non-Catholics believe as to state and describe Catholic teachings and perspectives in a positive, accurate, persuasive, and hopefully original way. I would characterize my own writing as expository Catholic commentary. For these reasons, I prefer the label "Catholic commentator" rather than Catholic apologist. Hence, in the future, I will refer to my books as Catholic commentary.

Sen. Brownback in the News

• Brownback to campaign in Iowa with brother of late Terri Schiavo, by Libby Quaid. AP. July 11, 2007.
  

• Appeals to Save North Korean Facing Execution for Being Christian July 14, 2007:

  The brother of the North Korean Christian man awaiting public execution for simply being a Christian pleaded with the world Thursday to press North Korea to release his elder brother.
  

  Presidential candidate Republican Senator Sam Brownback, meanwhile, backed up the appeal by demanding the man’s freedom.
  

  “Right now the purpose of my life is to save my brother,” said Son Jong Hoon. “Now I am also praying to God to save my brother.

  
  

• Meanwhile, Sen. Brownback has Brownbacker - "The Official Blog of the Brownback for President Campaign".
  

A Better Interpretation of Recent Vatican Documents

We have had quite a busy last few days as Catholics. First, the Pope has restored the legitimate liturgical diversity of the Church by allowing wider celebration of the 1962 Missal of Blessed John XXIII. Second, the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, with papal approval, has reaffirmed the teaching of Vatican II that the fullness of the Christian faith is found in the visible Catholic Church here on earth. Like any other events of this magnitude, misinterpretation is and will be rife. The "liberal" media (abetted by some "liberal" Catholics) will say, and is already saying in one way or another, that the Pope is reversing Vatican II--a glaring falsehood that is obvious to those who read the documents just issued. Ironically, some hyper-conservative Catholics may try to make the same false case that the Pope is reversing Vatican II. Religious issues, like political issues, make for strange bedfellows.

My analysis is quite different, and I certainly think true to the documents and to this great Pope. Liturgically, the Pope declared on Saturday that there is one Roman Rite with two forms. The ordinary form is that of the reformed Mass of Vatican II. The extraordinary form is the Mass that immediately preceded the reforms of Vatican II, that is, the Mass as contained in the 1962 Missal of John XXIII. Notice that the Pope did not reach back to earlier and more ancient missals such as that of Pope Pius V, who presided over the seminal Council of Trent from whose name we get the adjective "Tridentine."

The Pope's liturgical move makes it loud and clear that the reformed Mass of Vatican II is just as valid as any other preceding form of the Mass. In fact, he went even further. He did not just say that the reformed Vatican II Mass is equal to what came earlier in time. He labeled it the "ordinary" form of the Latin rite. Let's make this comparison. The "ordinary" minister of Holy Communion is the ordained priest. Under special circumstances, a lay person can be an "extraordinary" minister of Holy Communion. In the same way, the reformed Vatican II Mass is the "ordinary" form of the Mass. In special circumstances, priests can now celebrate with more freedom the "extraordinary" form of the Mass in the 1962 Missal. Thus, the papal liturgical declaration on Saturday is a devastating defeat for those who view the reformed Vatican II Mass as either invalid or as a fatal corruption of the liturgy. The reformed Vatican II Mass is in fact the preferred and presumptive form of the Roman Rite. In addition, as noted earlier, the Pope did not reach back to the classic Tridentine Mass of the 16th century. Rather, he went to the 1962 Missal which was the latest in several revisions of the 16th century Mass. In the future, you may see further changes in the 1962 Missal itself. I would not be surprised to see that eventually the 1962 Missal may be changed to incorporate some practices now found in the reformed Mass of Vatican II.

Moving away from liturgical matters, let's consider the Vatican document reaffirming the teaching of Vatican II that all the elements willed by Christ for his Church are found only in the Catholic Church. My preceding sentence says it all. As in his liturgical move, the Pope is resoundingly affirming the continuing validity of the decrees of Vatican II. In fact, contrary to the false "liberal" spin (see today's N.Y. Times to read an example), the Vatican explicitly declares that the Church of Christ is "operative" in Protestant communities and that the Holy Spirit uses Protestant communities as "instruments of salvation" (see the Second & Third Questions in the document on the Church recently posted on this blog). The document goes even further to say in the third question that these separated communities "are deprived neither of significance nor importance in the mystery of salvation." The misleading media coverage will say that the document is primarily a negative judgment on Protestant communities. In fact, what is most significant in the context of the sweep of Catholic history is the very generous positive assessment of the role of Protestant communities in the saving work of the Holy Trinity. The hyper-conservative theological mindset that might lead some to refuse to see the work of the Holy Spirit in Protestant communities suffers a major rebuke in this document. So, contrary to some media reports, this Vatican letter on the true Church is a strong foundation for authentic ecumenism among all Christians.

When we take a long view, we tend to see the significance of Vatican pronouncements better. When we suspend our own prejudices and biases, we tend to see better what the Pope is aiming to do. I submit that our great and bold Pope is daring to bring an end to the liturgical confusion present in both the theological right and the theological left. He is also daring to end the confusion present in both camps concerning separated Christians, especially Protestants. Contrary to some theologically liberal views, Protestants are not equivalent to Catholics when it comes to the gifts of Christ to his Church. Contrary to some theologically right-wing views, Protestants are very far from being strangers to the saving work of the Holy Spirit that proclaims the one Gospel of Christ. The Pope desires a serene reception for these documents. Let's give him that serene reception by focusing on what the documents actually say and on what their significance is in the broad context of centuries of Catholic history and teaching.

Catholics Against Rudy

. . . has officially launched.

Related News

• No Wafer for Rudy: "Giuliani campaigns as a Catholic, but he's on the outs with God", by Wayne Barrett. Village Voice June 26th, 2007:

  The ex-mayor's newfound piety also includes a mantra about abortion that wasn't heard while he was in City Hall. "I hate abortion," he now says across America and, in a proposed 12-point plan, he declares that he's committed to decreasing the number of abortions. "I would encourage someone to not take that option," he says, though as a candidate for mayor he said he would pay for an abortion for his daughter. Today, he says it would be "OK to repeal" Roe v. Wade, though he hosted celebrations of its anniversary three times at City Hall. His wholesale reversal on Medicaid funding, late-term abortions, and parental consent are all part of a repackaging designed to soften not just his New York public record, but also the inconvenient details of his personal life.

  Married three times, Giuliani simply isn't the Catholic candidate he claims to be. . . .

  On the whole a suprisingly good article from the Voice.

• And already a storm of controversy -- Andrew Sullivan and Vox Nova's Morning's Minion found something to criticize right off the bat. Michael Denton's got the goods at Catholics Against Rudy finds its first critic For the Greater Glory July 10th, 2007.
  

LifeSite Roundup

• American Bishop: Pro-Choice Equals No Communion For Catholics June 19, 2007:

  PATERSON, New Jersey, June 19, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Pro-choice Catholics, not just Catholic politicians, must not receive Communion if they knowingly support legalized abortion says an American Catholic bishop.
  

  "By steadfastly choosing to be pro-choice, a Catholic -- politician or not -- excludes himself or herself from communion," wrote Bishop Arthur J. Serratelli in the June 7 edition of the Beacon, the Paterson diocese newspaper.
  

  In his column Serratelli rebuked "pro-choice" Catholic politicians and those who "arrogantly insist that the Church does not have the right to her own teaching" and who claim a right to Communion at the same time. In particular Serratelli went after the 18 Democratic Congressmen who lashed out at Pope Benedict XVI for stating that supporting abortion is "incompatible with receiving communion"

  
  

• Pro-life Candidate Thompson Now Leads Republican Nomination, by Peter J. Smith. June 20, 2007.
  

• Bush Vetoes Embryonic Stem Cell Bill...Again, by John Jalsevac. June 20, 2007:

  For the second time during his presidency, George W. Bush has chosen to invoke his privilege of a presidential veto to veto a bill that, if signed into law, would lift the ban on federal funds being used for the purpose of destructive embryonic stem-cell research.
  

  Congress had already passed an almost identical bill about a year ago, which President Bush also vetoed.