- Hello from Syria!
- What I say to people who tell me I’m motivated by pride to question the Church
- Why I love First Things
- Catholics and Republicans on same-sex marriage and public reason
- Please don’t leave the Catholic Church!
- So, being 28…
- On Overthinking (and Susan Boyle)
- How Heresy Becomes Theology
- Why talking to certain Catholics is like talking to communists
- Changes to the Blog
- More Blog Entries
BustedBlog
March 24th, 2009
The Notre Dame Mess
You knew it was coming. Of course you did. Obama gets the nod to give a speech at America’s flaship Catholic university (for good or bad this is true folks. I mean, yes, I am aware of Franciscan, but a whole-lot of non-Catholics aren’t. Flagship doesn’t necessarily mean most orthodox or even best. Even though I do think ND has a strong case for the latter, but that’s another post). and then, poof, the anger begins.
See, for example, this article in Catholic Culture (with other links too), or this one in First Things, or this discussion of the tension at MSNBC. And then a response to all of this from America’s Michael Sean Winters.
I understand the worries about Obama. Frankly, I agree with the worries about Obama, at least in the context of abortion. But I think comparisons to slavery or now Mexican drug-dealers and the Church’s all-out refusal to deal with them aren’t entirely accurate here: abortion, unlike slavery, is an issue that pits two marginalized groups against each other. Slavery and drug wars are flat-out wrong and there’s not really a compelling case to be made for why certain forms of the two are ever justifiable. Hence, the church refuses to acknowledge some of their more heinous practitioners. But for abortion, at least in its early stages, there is a good faith argument people make in which they whole-heartedly believe that (a) this is not a full person worthy of the same rights and (b) someone else’s rights and needs are being defended. Now, of course, (a) could also be said of slavery, although clearly that was not true in the way that our society has come to define truth. (Yes, I know truth is more that just definition, but as for politics, it’s not). So my point is that at least some pro-choice people are operating in good faith and need to be engaged, not shunned.
Say whaaaat???? First, I wish you’d define “marginalized groups.” Aren’t we all human beings??? And second, “But for abortion, at least in its early stages, there is a good faith argument people make in which they whole-heartedly believe that (a) this is not a full person worthy of the same rights…”. How is taking a life a “good faith” argument???? I guess you’d then argue that we can take a life at any point we judge it to be, in your words, “not a full person worthy of the same rights”, (i.e. mentally ill, sick, old, etc.)???
Great post, Jeff. Dialogue is everything.
Good posting! I remember several years ago when Mario Cuomo, who had been involved in some legislation that ticked some people off, made a wonderful speech in which he spoke extensively on the matter or private conscience and the responsibility of representing the electorate. Whatever Mr. Obama’s own feelings about abortion, he has to represent the will of the majority and cannot impose in private morality/beliefs on a matter or the will of the people.
I am an Episcopalian who believes in the immorality of abortion, however, I also understand that I cannot impose my private beliefs if the majority of my fellow citizens disagree at the ballot-box.
There is also the grave danger that returning to the days of criminalizing the procedure will drive women back into the hands of the amateurs and quacks. I wish everybody would opt for chastity and responsible familly-planning, but the reality is that they won’t. I hate it, but, there it is. ALl I can do is bear witness to what I believe is the moral and “God-ordained” way to make these decisions and do my best to support people who do try to live in accordance with God’s will, but I am not going to condemn those who do not see it MY way to the horror that was the illegal abortion.
I see slavery as a societal offense since the slave owner was not related to the slave and inflicted great harm for a profit motive. Abortion is the killing of a child essentially by its mother for many reasons but not monetary gain. Abortion is wrong but the act seems to actually ’spare’ society from having to deal with the effects of unwanted pregnancies. As a solely intentional act of destroying life I would think God would view abortion as far worse than slavery–but ultimately both are mortal sins and a blot on America past and present.
Nancy Lea expressed my view also. I know in my heart and my mind that abortion is taking a human life and is wrong according to my faith, belief, knowledge, etc. However, I can still tolerate those who have not been blessed with my faith, belief, etc., I can still even “love” them. If I show some tolerance and “love”, even for ‘them’,
“they” might some day also be “blessed”. Hate gets us nowhere.
WJE - perfect…
Someone please explain exactly what the term “dialogue”means. The Catholic Church cannot even define it yet we hear so many people saying that dialogue is wonderful. Since the sixties, this “dialogue” has simply meant that the Catholic Church was now willing to compromise the Faith by admitting other denominations as valid churches. Dialogue was meant to find “common ground” but has largely resulted in the Catholic Church giving ground while other denominations have gained credibility. It has done nothing but damage to the Faith established by Jesus Christ, and recognized as such until the Reformation. To be Christian WAS to be Catholic.
Jesus never asked or instructed us to compromise the Faith with others. On the contrary, he instructed the Apostles to die if need be to save all men with the Faith He established. He established one church, not many. He desires His Truth to be understood the way the Apostles understood it, not the way men centuries later decided it should be understood.
If you were to make yourself known to others, would you describe yourself one way to a particular group and another way to a different group, and on and on…..?? It does not pass the simple logic test.
As long as this belief in the multiplicity and equality of religions prevails, we will get nowhere. It has nothing to do with people and their holiness or lack of it. It has to do with belief.
St Augustine said that the world has only two kinds of people: good and bad. The problem is that many good people end up on the wrong side. Amen.
Please note that the editorial staff reserves the right to not post comments it deems to be inappropriate and/or malicious in nature, as well as edit comments for length, clarity and fairness.