The New York Times is reporting that the mass-attending, barred-from-communion, pro-choice Catholic governor of Kansas, Kathleen Sebelius, is President Obama's pick to run the Department of Health & Human Services. She replaces Tom Daschle, another pro-choice Catholic--but with reservations--whose nomination was derailed by unpaid taxes. Pro-lifers may want to start a fundraiser for Daschle to get him back in the running.
As discussed here, Sebelius ran afoul of Kansas City Archbishop Joseph F. Naumann during last year's campaign. Naumann barred her from communion for her pro-choice views and may have scuttled her chances of being Obama's running mate.
But what goes around comes around, and now Sebelius could be spearheading the department with greatest oversight of the implementation of family planning policies. Of course she's also aces on health insurance, and a no-brainer for that issue, which is why Obama is bringing her on board. But don't think that will be the focus of Catholic commentary...
In this Q&A, Naumann explained his reasoning for barring her, while in an RNS commentary last June, David O'Brien, an emeritus church historian at Holy Cross College in Worcester, Mass., and Lisa Sowle Cahill, a professor of moral theology at Boston College, labeled actions against Sebelius and other pro-choice Catholic pols "Spiritual McCarthyism."
In Kansas City, Archbishop Joseph Naumann has ordered Sebelius not to receive Communion after she vetoed abortion legislation riddled with constitutional red flags. The bill in question made it easier for prosecutors to search private medical records, allowed family members to seek court orders to stop abortions and failed to include exceptions to save the life of the mother.Along with many public officials, Sebelius recognizes the profound moral gravity of abortion and has supported prudent public policies that have reduced abortions in Kansas. Yet in his diocesan newspaper, Naumann pulled few punches, blasting Sebelius for her "spiritually lethal" message and her obligation to recognize the "legitimate authority within the Church."
The archbishop has a right, and indeed an obligation, to speak out against abortion; Catholic public officials look to the church to help form their conscience. But the archbishop is on dangerous ground when he tells a democratically elected official how to govern when it comes to the particulars of specific legislation. The proper application of moral principles in a pluralistic society rarely allows for absolutes.
They continued:
If we remain silent when respected Catholic leaders are publicly attacked and denied Communion, the proper role of faith in our public square is grossly distorted. This election year, let's have a better debate about faith and political responsibility that reclaims the vital role religion has often played in renewing our most cherished democratic values.
So it goes...
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Hi Pagansister,
Wow! Got a week to discuss it? It’s a mixed pickle. The media (surprise!) didn’t bother to really analyze this one. So here’s my take.
Some parameters: First, the behavior in question indicates not only mental illness but criminal behavior as well. It may be explainable, but is not excusable.
Next, there are two categories in play here; Pedophilia, which is sex with a prepubescent child, and pederasty, which is sex with an older young person, in their teens.
There are two time periods: Pre-DSM III and Post-DSM III.
We now know that for Pedophiles, those who have sex with prepubescent children, the prognosis is extremely poor. For those who may have sex with older teens, 16,17,18 there is a different clinical picture with what some believe to be a substantially better prognosis. This understanding is more recent.
The Psychological and Psychiatric communities use the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the Mental Disorders (DSM) as their official diagnostic manual. In 1980, the third edition (DSM III) was released. This was a watershed for many Bishops in how they handled the accused Priests. Prior to DSM III, especially in the 1970’s and earlier, many in the area of sexual disorders thought that pedophilia was a treatable illness. The Bishops sought treatment for their Priests. In some cases, they were advised that the Priest was beyond cure and to laicize them, which the Bishops did. Others went away for months of therapy and were returned to their Bishops for active duty with the following advice. The environmental triggers for the breakdown would still be present in the parish. It would be wise to place the Priest in a different parish with supportive counseling. He should do fine.
We now know differently. In these cases I see the following problems. First, parents often did not want to prosecute to spare the child from having to testify in open court. Absent that, many Bishops in all good faith wished to see the offending Priest healed. They are, after all, brother Priests, and a Bishop is a father to his Priests. Another problem is that the Bishops did not always follow up on the progress of supportive counseling. When the Priest relapsed, that’s when they should have been thrown out. Many were, but not all. So, in the pre-DSM III era the Bishops in all sincerity followed the advice of the experts in the field, and I’m inclined in charity to cut them significant slack.
Things changed with the publication of DSM III. With an officially poorer prognosis, Bishops that shuttled Priests around were doing so without the advice to do so by the sexual disorders community of therapists. These guys knew better. Cardinal O’Connor was very proactive in New York. Priests got no second chances with him, and families were not just paid, but ministered to. The same may be said for many other Bishops. So, there too I see more good than the media reported.
Then there are the few Bishops like Cardinal Law. There is simply no excuse, no good will. Law was lawless, putting the “good” of the Church above justice. Doing justice IS the good of the Church. Rome did not bring him back to avoid prosecution. They got him out of the way and put in O’ Malley, who is a VERY holy man.
Law has no official duties in Rome, so far as I know. I hope he is spending the remainder of his life in prayer and penance for his having betrayed so many young people and their families, as well as his Church.
If we were to buy the media presentation, one would think that Catholic Priests are bogey men and the main threat to children. Tragically, the vicious skew given to the reporting has all but ignored this AP piece that got two day’s reporting on the difficulties faced by the Protestant Clergy with sex scandals,
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/06/14/america/NA-REL-US-Protestants-Sex-Abuse.php
Nor have the media reported that in US schools, according to the US Department of Education, "nearly 9.6% of students are targets of educator sexual misconduct sometime during their school career."*
*Shakeshaft, C, "Educator Sexual Misconduct: A Synthesis of the Literature", U.S. Department of Education, 2004, p26.8
To drive those numbers home, there are currently some 52,000,000 children enrolled in US schools, over 49,000,000 in Public Schools. 9.6% of 52 Million is 4,992,000. That means that an estimated 4,992,000 of the children K-12 today can expect to be the targets of educator sexual misconduct! You taught children Pagansister. This should make your blood run cold.
Comparatively, according to a justice department audit of Priest personnel files in the US dating back 52 years, there have been a total of 11,000 allegations brought against 4% of our clergy. In my Church, ONE is too many. However, do you smell the rancid odor of bigotry on the part of the media? They don’t love the children. They don’t care for the children. If they did, they would be all over the teachers and the Protestant clergy as well. But no. SILENCE.
All they love is their irrational and bigoted hatred of my Church. That hatred has been good for us. It has forced a much needed era of antisepsis. But where is the outrage over the abuse of millions?
Okay, that’s my take. BTW what kind of Irish Breakfast Tea? I enjoy Twinings Irish Breakfast Tea.
God Bless,
Gerry
FWIW, it is my understanding that one can embrace and believe in the Church's teaching on abortion (it is evil) and can also disagree with the political choices of Pro-Life groups.
There are many ways to stand up against the willful disregard for life, but I cannot say that I can or do throw my lot in with the establishment Pro-Life Groups. I think they distort the facts, misuse the truth, manipulate people who are uneducated about ways to fight abortion and needlessly exploit the babies who's lives are cut so brutally short.
None of that is in contradiction to the teaching of the Church. And I will not sit silently in a pew and be told that I must conform to the standards of some Political Action Committee as if that PAC somehow stands in for the Church just because there is a convergence in their beliefs on abortion.
Just my two cents.
"Top of the Morning to you, Gerard",
Twinings is my brand of Irish Breakfast Tea also. Delicious!
As always, your post answered my inquiries and informed me at the same time.
Yes, I did teach children, for over 24 years, the last 10 in a Catholic school. We had rules (as all schools and churches should have) about NOT being alone in a room with a child...and if so, the door was OPEN at all times. I had 5 year olds. I do understand that the RCC isn't the only group that has problems with misbehaving adults. There are always those that take advantage of their positions of trust. Women have contributed to the situation too, unfortuately. Women teachers that have gone off with their teen age male students...a situation is happening locally with a 22 year old high school teacher and a 15 year old student. Makes my blood boil.
We both totally agree :o) on Cardinal Law!
Take good care!
Hi Pagansister,
Scary about the female teachers, eh? Are there no absolutes?
Well, now it's Lent. I get to look long and hard at MY own warts and try to figure out how to eliminate a few more. Always a pleasant experience :o( but well worth the effort.
So we agree on the Tea and Cardinal Law. Who woulda thunk it?
It's been a great pleasure speaking with you and getting to know you. I look forward to more of the same!!
Pour a nice hot cup and have a great day.
Gerry
Good Afternoon, Gerard,
I too have enjoyed the interaction...and as you said...We agree on ....Tea and Cardinal Law!!! That's a plus! :o)
Take good care.
pagansister
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.