On The Main Blog

Creative Minority Reader

Fr. Reese: Bishops "Attacked" Obama, Took a Beating

I guess that's one way of seeing things. Or you could say that Obama's violating religious liberty and the bishops stood up for individual liberty:

Jesuit Fr. Thomas J. Reese, a senior fellow at the Woodstock Theological Center at Georgetown University, outrageously accused the bishops of attacking President Obama and said that the bishops then “took a beating at the polls” in a column that appeared in The National Catholic Reporter. His prescription is that the bishops should surrender on issues like the legalization of abortion and gay “marriage” and immediately allow pro-abortion rights politicians to speak on Catholic campuses.
Continue reading>>>

Your Ad Here


Clinton said...

Fr. Reese baffles me. Just why is it that the results
of a single election here in the US should change
the Church's perennial teachings on faith and morals
for Her members worldwide is beyond me.

Why should the faulty catechesis of the majority of
American Catholics ever trump the constant teaching
of the universal Church? Why does Fr. Reese think
that we here in the US get to decide what's true
the entire worldwide Church?

Evidently Fr. Reese believes that pro-Obama American
Catholics should determine what is true for all
Catholics, everywhere. What utter nonsense.

Anonymous said...

If Fr. Reese had his way, what would be the point of having the Catholic Church in the U.S. anymore?

Is it the Church's role to capitulate and yield to the winds of social degeneracy? Fr. Reese seems to think so.

Oh, that's the role of Jesuits and their universities.

Fr. Reese is representative of the type of "c"atholic who is a leftist first and Catholic in name only.

Their religion is leftism, cloaked in the trappings of Catholicism. They are idolators.

Purge the evil from your midst!

Mary De Voe said...

Father Reese, S.J.: Wolf in sheep's clothing.

Joseph D'Hippolito said...

Fr. Reese fails to address several points:

1. The bishops supported "ObamaCare" before they opposed it. Had they performed their due dilligence on both the man and the plan, they never should have supported it. A president who, as a state legislator, supported third-trimester abortions was going to impose that feature on any health-care plan he devised.

2. The Church cannot imagine how much moral credibility the American bishops have lost in the pews because of the clerical sex-abuse crisis. I don't think the bishops really understand, either.

3. The bishops have never really opposed abortion. They just gave such opposition lip service. Otherwise, Pope Benedict (through Cdl. Burke) would have disciplined Cdl. Wuerl for refusing to implement Canon 915 in the Archdiocese of D.C.

The Church as a whole -- from the Pope on down -- is not a reliable opponent against abortion on demand.

4. If Catholic officials really want to limit (let alone stop) abortion, they must devise curricula that teach young people the ethical, psychological and emotional skills to deal with sexual desire w/o resorting to intercourse or contraception. Whether we like it or not, abortion ultimately is a matter of personal moral responsibility, not government's. Whether we like it or not, government can only legislate morality in a reactive way.

5. The whole "anti-Catholic" approach has become the boy crying wolf. One of the most corrupt archbishops in American history, Cdl. John Cody of Chicago, used that phrase to motivate Catholics to oppose a legitimate federal investigation into his financial activities. It's routinely used to savage legitimate critics of the Church, much like liberals call their opponents "racist," "sexist," "homophbic," etc.

Joseph D'Hippolito said...

Finally, Catholics (especially their leaders) place all-too-much focus on public solutions as opposed to private ones. That goes back to the days when the Church demanded preferential treatment from government. That's reflected in the bishops' refusal to fight the government on Catholic Charities' adoption policies. That's reflected in the Church's entire stance on "social justice."

Nowhere in the NT did Jesus or His Disciples demand that the state care for the vulnerable. They demanded that the Church -- the Body of Christ -- do it. Right now, the Church is more interested in self-righteous rhetoric than in practical action. It will pay a price from God for that upside-down priority.

Popular Posts