Wednesday, November 5, 2014
Francis codifies pope's ability to effectively fire bishops | National Catholic Reporter
Francis codifies pope's ability to effectively fire bishops | National Catholic Reporter by Joshua McElwee. MGB: Looks like he is getting ready to fire some bishops. If Burke does not shut his trap now, he is as stupid as he is wrong about who is the final authority in natural law reasoning (the answer is the self - and this is over and above the rights of conscience which work in specific cases).
Pro-Life Politics | National Catholic Reporter
Pro-Life Politics | National Catholic Reporter by MSW. MGB: The politics of the pro-life movement are to get Republican elected - especially from Catholic votes. There was never an intention of actually doing anything. There is no broad consensus to reach because that would end the value of the issue politically. Know why the March of Dimes funds birth defects? Because they cured polio and that murdered their fundraising. The reason for the personhood movement, aside from its consistency with the notion that a fetus or embryo is a person (and to win points from the Catholic hierarchy because it backs Humanae Vitae on when life begins), is because voters were starting to suspect they were being played. Sad thing is, it worked (and it also got Democrats to realize that they were also in the same endless dance).
It is quite possible to do a compromise, although it would look very much like current law - but a bit harder on those who do elective abortions on children with Downs Syndrome and certain sexual defects. The radical thing would be to up the ante on the Child Tax Credit - make it say $1000 per month per child, divided between federal and state taxes. This would mostly end abortion for economic reasons and force most clinics to close, all without violating privacy rights. It would, however, deeply offend people in the pro-life movement who believe people should be responsible for raising their own kids (and should avoid sex if they can't afford them).
It is quite possible to do a compromise, although it would look very much like current law - but a bit harder on those who do elective abortions on children with Downs Syndrome and certain sexual defects. The radical thing would be to up the ante on the Child Tax Credit - make it say $1000 per month per child, divided between federal and state taxes. This would mostly end abortion for economic reasons and force most clinics to close, all without violating privacy rights. It would, however, deeply offend people in the pro-life movement who believe people should be responsible for raising their own kids (and should avoid sex if they can't afford them).
Tuesday, November 4, 2014
More from Cardinal Burke | National Catholic Reporter
More from Cardinal Burke | National Catholic Reporter by MSW. MGB: Burke is whistling past the grave yard. While he is correct that one one baptized gay marriage this week or really did anything about how divorce was handled - and that some divorced and remarried Catholics may go ahead and recieve Communion now, rather than the end of the process is declared - gays probably are not confused (and any priest blessing such a union would do so anyway). Burke is afraid that these will be the results at the end of the process and that this will say something about the infallibility of the Magisterium (as in, it is not). He is probably also thinking that those who are acting now probably have been doing their own reasoning for themselves anyway - and that scares him deeply - not because these people may be risking their souls but because maybe, just maybe, they are not. And if not, where does that leave him and the rest of the hierarchy?
Next Week's USCCB Mtg, Part II | National Catholic Reporter
Next Week's USCCB Mtg, Part II | National Catholic Reporter by MSW. MGB: The second piece focuses on a how the culture warrior mindset arose, focusing on Weigel's First Things piece in February of 2011 which heralded the end of the Bernardine era, which you can read at http://www.firstthings.com/article/2011/02/the-end-of-the-bernardin-era. Quite interesting points, but with some real gaps, like the roll of Cardinal Rigali of the Curia and then Philadelphia as St. John Paul's enforcer among the American bishops. That era ended with the death of John Paul and with the discrediting of the Cardinal without his name being mentioned in the investigation of child abuse in his See. He found no comfort from Pope Benedict, whose real job was not writing theology but making the Dallas Accords world wide and holding bishops to account. Still Cardinal Dolan, who followed the advice of his lawyers as Archbishop of Milwaukee to transfer property - probably because it belonged to parishes, not the bishop, made it to New York and a red hat, as well as the USCCB Chair (over a member of the Bernardin Mafia) - although now his term is up and more liberal bishops, like the Bishop of Spokane, are on the rise with the election of Pope Francis.
While Bernardin spoke about a Seemless Garment of Life, he did not focus on Birth Control as the current conservative clique has. However, also did not do what was obvious, which was to denounce the Pro-Life movement as a sham in service to the Republican Party, having no intention to ever end legal abortion (which is almost impossible in an American Constitutional system). Telling the truth would have meant difficult discussions with Rome, who saw abortion legalization as a series of defeats by parliamentary majorities in circumstances which did not nor could not happen here. Also, throwing Republican bishops under the bus as frauds would have been profoundly painful, especially given the fact that many Catholics in the pews have bought into the movement's logic of abortion being a matter of personal guilt, while employers or the state could not be forced to provide a high enough wage to raise each new child, as this would end the need for personal economic responsibility by the parent(s).
Now, for MSW's analsys. he looks at the Church like Francis does, as a field hospital for souls rather than a field of combat for issues - however issues don't arise from the thin air, they come from people with a common view point. Many of the new leaders have Charities as their viewpoint, starting with the new conference president, Bishop Kurtz (OK, Archbishop, we knew him as a bishop while assigned to CCUSA). Then there is the new Metropolitan of Chicago, Bishop (probably soon to be Cardinal, wouldn't that cheese Chaput), Blaise Cupich of Spokane. I am sure there are others - and whether they are tied to Bernardin is not important. Charity is their purpose - and not just get a pittance from the flock, huge amounts from major donors (hoping none of their kids are gay and in search of a marriage blessing) but also to help in the public sector through government contracts (more than half their budget). This seems to be a common priority generally, but some bishops do it better than others. Then, flying over the heads of the USCCB is Cardinal Joseph O'Malley, OSF, with his trusted copilot, Bryan Hehir (who you may have noticed was mentioned in the First Things article on his war and piece work, before becoming my wife's boss at Catholic Charties USA and going to Boston to oversee Charities there (coming back after Hurricane Isabel to baptize my daughter).
MSW pronounces the agenda a snoozer. I suspect that the bishops are bit shell shocked after the Rigali era and the recent spate of opposition to the public, where they served as foils for Valerie Jarrett (not Kattherine Sebelius') war on women. Even losing Hobby Lobby simply extended the approach to certain closely held firms what is followed by the Church under the law - let someone else fund it but don't stop the women from getting it. All that work for just this bit? Sad. Most of the bishops want a good meal in the Inner Harbor, some reports no one will remember and no more coverage. Back at home, their concern with charity is that their Catholic Charities organization works (and does not embarrass them by sending a mirgant for an abortion - luckily that contract is gone), that the Bishops's appeal is successful and that the annual fundraising ball goes off without a hitch and no money. They hope that this trend to simple living. I suspect that they want CCUA and CHA to do the heavily lifting on poverty, which does it better anyway - even if they do sometimes go where the bishops don't want them to - indeed, CHA got Obamacare passed, probably much to the relief of anyone left from the Bernardin network. As for end of life issues, get a panel of aged Monsignori together to talk about end of life medicine and hope none of them are too terribly honest.
The last notable Bernadin network employee is Barack Obama, who began work in Catholic Charities of Chicago under Bernardin (and these are small organizations, they would have had to have me). Writing in 2011 was probably a hope that Obama was a one term President (oops!) - so some kind of Bernardin era is still existing - one where the President worked with the heads of CCUSA and CHA to devise a workaround (which was likely already drafted) on contraception. I suspect the presidents of both organizations still have their White House ID Badges.
MSW suggest looking at the final message of the Synod. You can read it here, http://whispersintheloggia.blogspot.com/2014/10/we-stand-at-door-and-knock-synods-last.html. Turns out, this is a press release! It even ends with -30-. (They made that mistake with Terri Schaivo). It is designed to smooth over differences and not say anything that anyone can disagree with unless they want to be disagreeable. The real work should be in distributing it to each diocese and eparchy for discussion with the laity (including not accusing parishoners of sin if they think Catholic doctrine needs to change). Discussion by the USCCB is not necessary and will only allow those who would damn the forces of change to get air time they do not deserve. The time for the USCCB to act is after it sends comments to Rome for consolidation - and it should be before the second part of the Synod rather than after the Synod meetings. After the second Synod, there may be no action or there may be great debate. I suspect it will take months, not weeks.
MSW suspects that Tobin, Chaput, Burke and others will be lightning rods for seeking unity of the anti-Bernardin, and face it, anti-Francis forces. He hopes the Nuncio would counsel against this and I am sure that will be the case. I suspect that the appointment in Chicago likely sent the much needed message even more strongly, as well as the removal of Burke from the Conference on Bishops and the Pentitentiary. Burke was free to speak because he has nowhere to fall - the others should realize that they have more at stake. Sadly, it sometimes takes baser motives to stop base disloyalty.
MSW points out that the Faithful Citizenship document needs updating to include the latest from the Pope, Evangelii Gaudium, which would add more emphasis on charity - and I suspect here that should mean what I have been pushing - a larger child tax cut. I suspect those who still resist the Seemless Garment would rather not trouble their Republican base with such honesty about the relationship between poverty and abortion and a societal responsiblity for this - not just something for the confessional. Of course, to be really Medieval, excommunicate Catholic business owners or stockholders who pay worker families too little - of course that may require a public absolution to begin every bishop's conference.
Will the Mass on the border be discussed? I guess it depends. If the Latino vote comes out voting strongly Democratic, I suspect that the Conservatives will be incensed, especially Weigel. We will see that one tonite.
In the last paragraph, MSW actually talks about the Weigel essay. He states that Wiegel saw accomodation to the culture as Bernardin's problem. I disagree - because if the culture is reality and speaks truth, accomodation is not what you do, you participate. What Bernardin did, which sowed a brief period where those who were close to John Paul II ruled, was to actually include respect for the views of the conservative bishops and their flocks (including some parishes in with a liberal bishop). Bernardin anathematized no one (except SAC - and the President responded by taking cities off the table) and it is likely that they expect Francis to do the same thing. So far he has. Even though they came of age with the hardball tactics of Cardinal Rigalli under St. John Paul, they think Francis is a softie. Only so far - just ask Cardinal Burke. As for the staff, I expect that those who focused on Religious Freedom (OK, Power, lets be honest) will leave soon or sometime after the Obama Administration. Some will go back to their provinces - either where they were before or to the bishop who brought them. It will be clear fairly soon, maybe this year, maybe next, that culture warriors on staff will not be the armor that they themselves need. They need staff that is able to tell them no - just like they ened to be able to hear no from the pews. It would have saved us the depopulation of Humane Vitae.
While Bernardin spoke about a Seemless Garment of Life, he did not focus on Birth Control as the current conservative clique has. However, also did not do what was obvious, which was to denounce the Pro-Life movement as a sham in service to the Republican Party, having no intention to ever end legal abortion (which is almost impossible in an American Constitutional system). Telling the truth would have meant difficult discussions with Rome, who saw abortion legalization as a series of defeats by parliamentary majorities in circumstances which did not nor could not happen here. Also, throwing Republican bishops under the bus as frauds would have been profoundly painful, especially given the fact that many Catholics in the pews have bought into the movement's logic of abortion being a matter of personal guilt, while employers or the state could not be forced to provide a high enough wage to raise each new child, as this would end the need for personal economic responsibility by the parent(s).
Now, for MSW's analsys. he looks at the Church like Francis does, as a field hospital for souls rather than a field of combat for issues - however issues don't arise from the thin air, they come from people with a common view point. Many of the new leaders have Charities as their viewpoint, starting with the new conference president, Bishop Kurtz (OK, Archbishop, we knew him as a bishop while assigned to CCUSA). Then there is the new Metropolitan of Chicago, Bishop (probably soon to be Cardinal, wouldn't that cheese Chaput), Blaise Cupich of Spokane. I am sure there are others - and whether they are tied to Bernardin is not important. Charity is their purpose - and not just get a pittance from the flock, huge amounts from major donors (hoping none of their kids are gay and in search of a marriage blessing) but also to help in the public sector through government contracts (more than half their budget). This seems to be a common priority generally, but some bishops do it better than others. Then, flying over the heads of the USCCB is Cardinal Joseph O'Malley, OSF, with his trusted copilot, Bryan Hehir (who you may have noticed was mentioned in the First Things article on his war and piece work, before becoming my wife's boss at Catholic Charties USA and going to Boston to oversee Charities there (coming back after Hurricane Isabel to baptize my daughter).
MSW pronounces the agenda a snoozer. I suspect that the bishops are bit shell shocked after the Rigali era and the recent spate of opposition to the public, where they served as foils for Valerie Jarrett (not Kattherine Sebelius') war on women. Even losing Hobby Lobby simply extended the approach to certain closely held firms what is followed by the Church under the law - let someone else fund it but don't stop the women from getting it. All that work for just this bit? Sad. Most of the bishops want a good meal in the Inner Harbor, some reports no one will remember and no more coverage. Back at home, their concern with charity is that their Catholic Charities organization works (and does not embarrass them by sending a mirgant for an abortion - luckily that contract is gone), that the Bishops's appeal is successful and that the annual fundraising ball goes off without a hitch and no money. They hope that this trend to simple living. I suspect that they want CCUA and CHA to do the heavily lifting on poverty, which does it better anyway - even if they do sometimes go where the bishops don't want them to - indeed, CHA got Obamacare passed, probably much to the relief of anyone left from the Bernardin network. As for end of life issues, get a panel of aged Monsignori together to talk about end of life medicine and hope none of them are too terribly honest.
The last notable Bernadin network employee is Barack Obama, who began work in Catholic Charities of Chicago under Bernardin (and these are small organizations, they would have had to have me). Writing in 2011 was probably a hope that Obama was a one term President (oops!) - so some kind of Bernardin era is still existing - one where the President worked with the heads of CCUSA and CHA to devise a workaround (which was likely already drafted) on contraception. I suspect the presidents of both organizations still have their White House ID Badges.
MSW suggest looking at the final message of the Synod. You can read it here, http://whispersintheloggia.blogspot.com/2014/10/we-stand-at-door-and-knock-synods-last.html. Turns out, this is a press release! It even ends with -30-. (They made that mistake with Terri Schaivo). It is designed to smooth over differences and not say anything that anyone can disagree with unless they want to be disagreeable. The real work should be in distributing it to each diocese and eparchy for discussion with the laity (including not accusing parishoners of sin if they think Catholic doctrine needs to change). Discussion by the USCCB is not necessary and will only allow those who would damn the forces of change to get air time they do not deserve. The time for the USCCB to act is after it sends comments to Rome for consolidation - and it should be before the second part of the Synod rather than after the Synod meetings. After the second Synod, there may be no action or there may be great debate. I suspect it will take months, not weeks.
MSW suspects that Tobin, Chaput, Burke and others will be lightning rods for seeking unity of the anti-Bernardin, and face it, anti-Francis forces. He hopes the Nuncio would counsel against this and I am sure that will be the case. I suspect that the appointment in Chicago likely sent the much needed message even more strongly, as well as the removal of Burke from the Conference on Bishops and the Pentitentiary. Burke was free to speak because he has nowhere to fall - the others should realize that they have more at stake. Sadly, it sometimes takes baser motives to stop base disloyalty.
MSW points out that the Faithful Citizenship document needs updating to include the latest from the Pope, Evangelii Gaudium, which would add more emphasis on charity - and I suspect here that should mean what I have been pushing - a larger child tax cut. I suspect those who still resist the Seemless Garment would rather not trouble their Republican base with such honesty about the relationship between poverty and abortion and a societal responsiblity for this - not just something for the confessional. Of course, to be really Medieval, excommunicate Catholic business owners or stockholders who pay worker families too little - of course that may require a public absolution to begin every bishop's conference.
Will the Mass on the border be discussed? I guess it depends. If the Latino vote comes out voting strongly Democratic, I suspect that the Conservatives will be incensed, especially Weigel. We will see that one tonite.
In the last paragraph, MSW actually talks about the Weigel essay. He states that Wiegel saw accomodation to the culture as Bernardin's problem. I disagree - because if the culture is reality and speaks truth, accomodation is not what you do, you participate. What Bernardin did, which sowed a brief period where those who were close to John Paul II ruled, was to actually include respect for the views of the conservative bishops and their flocks (including some parishes in with a liberal bishop). Bernardin anathematized no one (except SAC - and the President responded by taking cities off the table) and it is likely that they expect Francis to do the same thing. So far he has. Even though they came of age with the hardball tactics of Cardinal Rigalli under St. John Paul, they think Francis is a softie. Only so far - just ask Cardinal Burke. As for the staff, I expect that those who focused on Religious Freedom (OK, Power, lets be honest) will leave soon or sometime after the Obama Administration. Some will go back to their provinces - either where they were before or to the bishop who brought them. It will be clear fairly soon, maybe this year, maybe next, that culture warriors on staff will not be the armor that they themselves need. They need staff that is able to tell them no - just like they ened to be able to hear no from the pews. It would have saved us the depopulation of Humane Vitae.
Monday, November 3, 2014
Affluence, College & Opportunity | National Catholic Reporter
Affluence, College & Opportunity | National Catholic Reporter by MSW. MGB: We had and still have in Iowa a better one - both in state rates and an Iowa tuition grant for anyone who goes to private school - eliminating the difference in cost between public and private tuition. Does it help the rich? Probably - I guess that depends on how you define rich. It helps middle class and even poor people - from doctors kids on the top to an engineer's kids in the middle. I think most poor kids, if they went anywhere, went to community college because income and grades really are related for the vast majority. When my sister bought a house in Maryland, I am sure she was thinking that College Park was a benefit. Now that my brother-in-law and she are, shall we say, not at all poor, she may want him there, but she may want him in Georgetown or Harvard, etc. He will probably not be a scholarship student - though may earn one - and financial aid may or may not be a concern. It likely will be for my daughter, but who knows? The point is not confessional, it is that these schools should be available so that plane fair need not be a college cost (my daughter likes the arts, so she may go to Charlottesville, probably not to Blacksburg if her math homework is an indication). Of course, because Virginia is big, Charlottesvile may be a plane ride in the winter. One final point - DC Students get in state tuition everywhere, particularly locally, giving DC kids the right to a good and affordable education as if they were Marylanders. Fred ignores that. Shame on Fred.
Dissing the Pope | National Catholic Reporter
Dissing the Pope | National Catholic Reporter by MSW. MGB: Cardinal Burke is an older Baby Boomer, who unlike the President, my wife and myself, thought that authority was a good thing, as was the War in Viet Nam. He wants someone to tell him, and even more so all those pesky parishoners, how to think rather than how to think for themselves. He is pathological and his views are no longer of any consequence accept as a reflection of those who share them - who should be treated with mercy as they become ready to find out whether their belief that God is an Ogre is really true. (By the way, its not). As for Pater Franesco, he has certainly had to deal with plenty of the hyper-orthodox in his See in South America. I will leave the personnel moves regarding Burke and whether he is to be censured to the Holy Father.
Next Week's USCCB Meeting, Part I | National Catholic Reporter
Next Week's USCCB Meeting, Part I | National Catholic Reporter by MSW. MGB: Staff turnover has been interesting, as well as the lack of turnover - like in the pro-life office that effectively spun opposition to Obamacare as a pro-life issue - when the original position was that the new law would reflect current law. If that meant outcomes - say that the those who were funded for abortion before by employers and are now funded through the exchanges, then the USCCB lied about its position. If it meant that the status quo was all federal subsidies have a Hyde Amendment on them, then they should have said so - everyone else would have called foul. Regardless - Richard Doerflinger is still there.
The advance of Gay Marriage and the continuing disputes over birth control, however, are coming to a quick end and were really never political issues at the end anyway. Gays are clearly being treated as a separate class by denying them marriage and other rights (see Roemer) and marriage has been a right for all since Loving v. Virginia. It is unlikey that any Federal Circuit Court was ever going to support the bishops. Additionally, Hobby Lobby ends the contraception mandate cases, which has alrways been about a small change in contraception funding by ending deductibles - the coverage itself is and has been a civil right since December 2000. If I worked on the last two issues I would be affraid for my job, because there was no way to win the job big anyway and even winning meant that insurance companies would cover the copayment for contraception for the staff of Hobby Lobby. No blastocysts were saved by the case at all and religiously oriented firms simply gained the right to throw a hissy fit.
The only possible use for those whose expertise was fighting a liberal figure head like Obama is to use them to fight a liberal Pope - and that will only happen if Chaput, Pell, Burke (so far from Malta) and Dolan wish to throw the entire Conference into dissent and the Conference lets them. I don't think Dolan will go with the conservatives on this one - he is either too loyal or too smart politically to be in open rebellion to the Holy Father and the people are hungry for the discussion that is about to take place. If Dolan sided with political allies - in the crassest meaning of the term - rather than the sheep (forget Francis) then he belongs in Malta with Burke. As for Weigel, he needs to decide whether his loyalties are with his politics or his Pope and people. I somehow do not think he will chose well and if so, this may be the start of his last hurrah (as the people who buy his nonsense are also dying off). For Examiner readers, I will plug this into tomorrow's column.
The advance of Gay Marriage and the continuing disputes over birth control, however, are coming to a quick end and were really never political issues at the end anyway. Gays are clearly being treated as a separate class by denying them marriage and other rights (see Roemer) and marriage has been a right for all since Loving v. Virginia. It is unlikey that any Federal Circuit Court was ever going to support the bishops. Additionally, Hobby Lobby ends the contraception mandate cases, which has alrways been about a small change in contraception funding by ending deductibles - the coverage itself is and has been a civil right since December 2000. If I worked on the last two issues I would be affraid for my job, because there was no way to win the job big anyway and even winning meant that insurance companies would cover the copayment for contraception for the staff of Hobby Lobby. No blastocysts were saved by the case at all and religiously oriented firms simply gained the right to throw a hissy fit.
The only possible use for those whose expertise was fighting a liberal figure head like Obama is to use them to fight a liberal Pope - and that will only happen if Chaput, Pell, Burke (so far from Malta) and Dolan wish to throw the entire Conference into dissent and the Conference lets them. I don't think Dolan will go with the conservatives on this one - he is either too loyal or too smart politically to be in open rebellion to the Holy Father and the people are hungry for the discussion that is about to take place. If Dolan sided with political allies - in the crassest meaning of the term - rather than the sheep (forget Francis) then he belongs in Malta with Burke. As for Weigel, he needs to decide whether his loyalties are with his politics or his Pope and people. I somehow do not think he will chose well and if so, this may be the start of his last hurrah (as the people who buy his nonsense are also dying off). For Examiner readers, I will plug this into tomorrow's column.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)