THOUGHTS ON THE BISHOPS' MEETING
NOWADAYS, VOTERS IGNORE BISHOPS
Dear Friend of Catholic Answers:
When we think of the things we ought to be thankful for (a good exercise a few days before Thanksgiving), there is one big one we often overlook: our existence.
God owes us nothing. He didn't have to create us, and he didn't need us in any way. Before he created us and our world, he was sufficient in himself. He didn't need creatures to fill a void he had. He had no void.
But he created us anyway and keeps us in existence from moment to moment. When we preoccupy ourselves with quotidian things--family life, the work place, school, health concerns--we become distracted from the biggest gift we have been given, that we are here at all.
ARE THE BISHOPS LAYMEN?
That's a question posted by Jeffrey Mirus at his web site Catholic Culture,
http://www.catholicculture.org/highlights/highlights.cfm?id=87
Mirus writes:
"Three controversial issues surfaced at the U.S. bishops' November meeting in Washington: the death penalty, the rejection of Church teaching by Catholic politicians, and liturgical translations. All three are important; one would also think they are fairly straightforward. Yet the bishops clearly have no clue how to handle any of them, apparently because they don't understand their own identity."
Here is Mirus's take on the first of the issues, capital punishment:
"The only issue on which the bishops largely agree is the abolition of the death penalty. To this end, they overwhelmingly approved an eleven-page statement endorsing a campaign to eliminate capital punishment in the United States.
"Whether or not one agrees with this position, it staggers even the boldest imagination that the bishops should still be playing the part of laymen when the Church herself has so many pressing problems that only bishops can address. And make no mistake, the question of whether or not capital punishment should be abolished is a prudential judgment reserved to the laity.
"Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio of Brooklyn gave the game away after the vote when he stated in a press conference that while abortion and euthanasia can never be justified because they are 'intrinsically evil,' Catholics may disagree with the bishops' position on capital punishment without separating themselves from the Church.
"This is exactly true, and it immediately shows why the bishops should not be issuing statements on this topic. It is a usurpation of a role proper to the laity to proclaim this position and launch this campaign. And quite apart from the ecclesiological impropriety, what in actual practice have the bishops managed so well lately that we would want them to take over American politics?"
Let's think about what Mirus says. There are two chief points.
The first is that capital punishment is not a non-negotiable. A Catholic is free to support the use of the death penalty or to support its abolition. You can't say that a Catholic who thinks the death penalty is warranted in certain cases is a bad Catholic, and you can't say that a Catholic who wants to do away with the death penalty is a bad Catholic.
That almost all of the American bishops endorse the latter position is not germane to the question of which positions Catholics may hold concerning the death penalty. The bishops' statement inartfully leaves many--Catholics and non-Catholics alike--with the impression that there is only one stance acceptable to the Church, but that is just not true.
The second point is that the American bishops have had a tendency to step on the toes of the laity, despite talk about "empowerment" of the latter. It is enough to be reminded of the 1986 pastoral on the economy, which went beyond a restatement of the Church's social teachings as given in papal encyclicals. That document plumped for particular economic policies about which Catholics were free to disagree and about which the bishops had no particular expertise.
WHY OUR BISHOPS ARE INEFFECTUAL IN POLITICS
The more often our bishops issue statements that reflect their private preferences but not the binding teaching of the Church, the more they will be ignored. The more they are ignored, the less attention will be paid to them when they do issue statements about non-negotiable issues.
It's a pity. We're coming up on another election next year, and the non-negotiable issues mentioned in Catholic Answers' "Voter's Guide for Serious Catholics" are still topics of heated discussion. Absolute clarity is needed on these issues. What also is needed is a clear "lead" by the bishops.
That will be hard to have if attention is focused on non-negotiable issues, and that is just what the media want. They prefer to have the bishops talk about issues other than abortion, euthanasia, homosexual "marriage," embryonic stem-cell research, and human cloning. Those are all no-win positions to liberal reporters: Each time they write about bishops opposing those things, the Catholic position advances a little further.
But if the bishops occupy themselves with lesser matters, especially those on which there is no single position that a Catholic must accept, then the media can cover what the bishops say without having to cover what they say about the non-negotiables.
p.s., If you have a comment about anything appearing in this E-Letter, please do not hit your Reply button. Instead, go to Catholic Answers' discussion forums at
http://forums.catholic.com
where you may post your comment in the forum dedicated to the E-Letter. You will find a thread devoted to this issue of the E-Letter. Feel free to add your comment in the form of a reply to that thread.
|
C A T H O L I C A N S W E R S :
[TOP]
of
Discuss
Index
Prior issue
Next issue
Sign up