« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

A Kennedy Tries To Tell The Bishops How To Be Catholic

FAIL

For all their protestations to the contrary, liberals have an awful habit of trying to tell people of faith, notably the Catholic Church, what their faith means and how it should apply in the political sphere. If you can stomach the irony, let’s take a look at the latest example of this genre, an opinion piece in the Politico by Robert Kennedy’s daughter, former Maryland Lieutenant Governor Kathleen Kennedy Townsend.

Kennedy (I use her maiden name because it’s the only thing that gets her published) starts off well enough, with the title “On health care, the bishops have lost their way”. There, we agree; the Bishops have inserted themselves into the health care debate by calling for a national health insurance scheme – including their call for it to cover illegal aliens – that may be well-intentioned but will have many dire practical consequences, and which confuses the individual duty of Christian charity with the power to compel others to give to Caesar. These are not problems of Catholic doctrine, they are problems of practical economics and practical politics, two areas in which the Bishops do not have the most sterling record. Worse yet, as far as their purely political judgment, the Bishops seem unable to understand that positive aspects of the proposed bills – restrictions on funding for abortion, conscience protections for Catholic hospitals – may be necessary for their passage into law, but will forever be subject to unilateral renegotiation by Congress, which when it comes to massive entitlement programs always operates on the principle of Darth Vader at Cloud City: “I am altering the deal. Pray I don’t alter it any further.”

Pray indeed.

But of course, Kennedy wants the Church to agitate for precisely this program; what she objects to is that the Church, having come this far in support of the bill, insists that it can’t support a bill that doesn’t include the Stupak Amendment’s restrictions on abortion funding.

Kennedy can’t resist dripping scorn at the sorts of folk the Bishops have associated themselves with:

As Catholics, are we so laser focused on the issue of abortion that we are willing to join tea partiers…

Presumably, tax collectors and prostitutes would be even worse. No, on second thought, considering who supports this bill, perhaps not. But in making an argument about how the Bishops should prioritize their moral teachings, Kennedy makes not the slightest effort to explain why the Church shouldn’t be “laser focused” on abortion, given that the Church teaches that abortion is a grave moral evil that entails the willful taking of a human life. That failure to consider the core nature of the Church teaching at issue vitiates the entirety of Kennedy’s argument.

Kennedy goes on to defend the weaker provisions of a substitute provision that would not include the Stupak Amendment’s bar on the use of federal dollars to purchase any insurance that covers abortion. As I have explained previously, the intrusive nature of the bill makes any such “middle ground” wholly illusory; either you accept the Stupak Amendment’s functionally pro-life provisions, or you accept a bill that is functionally pro-abortion; the bill leaves no room for a middle ground on this issue. But in doing so, she adds calculated insult to injury:

Catholic organizations like Catholic Charities receive hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding for nonreligious services as long as those funds are separated from religious work. If this solution is good enough for Catholic organizations, then it is certainly good enough for health care reform.

So, now she just told the Catholic Church that it should regard the work of Catholic Charities as equivalent to the work of abortion mills. I’m sure that’s an applause line at MSNBC and the New York Times, but if it’s supposed to persuade the Bishops, she should maybe consider also comparing them to the Nazis.

If Nelson’s amendment is a Senate version of the Stupak amendment, as expected, it will ban abortion not only in the public option but, effectively, throughout the exchange created by health care reform.

This is the point by which she has completely forgotten that she’s still putatively talking to the Bishops, who obviously regard such a ban as a very good thing, perhaps the best thing the bill could do.

There are millions of pro-abortion rights Catholics who understand that women faced with unintended pregnancies or complications in wanted pregnancies have to make difficult, complex decisions for themselves and their families.

By now, the pretense of talking to the Bishops is completely gone, as she’s instead pitching for the support of Catholics who reject the Bishops’ teachings on a core issue. There are also millions of Catholics who are adulterers, drug addicts and hoodlums. The Bishops are supposed to minister to them and seek correction and forgiveness of their sins, not accomodate their embrace of sin.

The U.S. Senate recently took an important vote toward improving women’s access to preventive health care under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. The women’s health amendment would guarantee health insurance coverage, at no cost sharing, for women’s preventive care, including lifesaving screenings, well-woman exams and contraception to prevent unintended pregnancy.

This amendment captures the very essence of what health care reform is supposed to be about…

Again, Kennedy ignores here the possibility that perhaps the Bishops don’t consider access to artificial contraception to be a good thing either.

I want Catholic bishops to heed the Vatican’s call for charity and justice for all, not just for the wealthy and well connected.

The irony of this last coming from a Kennedy is staggering. Ted Kennedy, in his dying days, managed to get the ear of the Pope himself, and to get a Catholic funeral despite not only his personal sins – which after all, may be forgiven – but more importantly his lifelong, public and utterly unrepentant advocacy of legal abortion. There is perhaps no greater stain on the American Catholic Church’s commitment to any sort of egalitarianism than the persistent favor and preferential treatment it has showered on the Kennedy family. There can be no less persuasive messenger to make such a claim than a Kennedy.

The Catholic Church is a human institution. As such, has been slow, terribly slow, to recognize the practical dangers presented by the healthcare bill. But even its belated efforts to avoid lending its support to a pro-abortion bill are apparently too much for Kennedy-style “Catholics” to bear. They have the right, of course, to reject the Church’s teachings. But the last thing the Catholic Bishops need is a lecture on moral judgment by a Kennedy.

COMMENTS

  • Swamp_Yankee

    Kennedy may have an ally in January, when the uptight and condescending know-it-all Catholic, who insists on telling the entire Church heirarchy they are wrong about nearly everything, may become a member of the Senate. Some have called her Pope Martha. She’ll make a nice pair with John Kerry.

  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

    Glad to see someone else also pointing out the obvious flaws in how Liberals misuse real Religion for the benefit of their preferred Worship of the State – “Separation from Church to State” (Liberals misuse Religion for Liberal Govt. expansion) always being their ultimate goal as they misapply the Render unto Caesar concept. Just as they twist the good and well-intention Charity of It Takes A Village. Their desire to filter and alter everything through their Liberal Laziness also brought on the distortion of ‘The Greater Good’ — “The needs of the many out-weigh the needs of the few, or the one.”. They always try to COOPT and create an Effective Equivalence (more) of a positive concept that they can sell to the Politically Brain-dead to be duped into supporting!

  • strikeeagle

    Re-post of comment from Monday:

    The ONLY way to prevent Federally-funded abortions is to NOT give the Federal Government:

    1. The AUTHORITY to define health plan benefits (public or commercial/private plans)
    2. The FUNDING to pay for health plan services

    The current Democrat health care reform plans provide for both.

    To support HCR even with the Stupak Amendment cedes the Pro-Life Agenda to:
    1. An Administration that will define and interpret what services are covered in health plans
    a. Re-interpreting the Public Law without regard to original spirit and intent or other components of the administration striking the provision down; e.g. Attorney General, Civil Rights Commission, etc.
    b. A politically-appointed Secretary of Health and Human Services defining benefits and writing the implementing regulations; e.g. determining abortion is in the best ?emotional/mental? health of the mother . . .
    c. Not enforcing, ignoring or turning a ?blind eye? to violations of the law; e.g. it wasn?t an abortion, but a ?D&C? . . .

    2. The Congress that can change the law at a later date (or even in the Conference Committee)

    3. The Federal Courts (perhaps the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals) and relying on them
    a. Not striking the law down as unconstitutional
    b. Not having activist judges (appointed by President Obama and confirmed by the Democrat Senate) interpreting what services health plans should cover and what are ?necessary? services, or by accepting challenges to Stupak
    c. As our experience with them is thirty-six years later, Roe versus Wade is still the law of the land

    These risks are not only with abortion, but euthanasia and assisted-suicide services as well.

    Plain and simple, the Pro-Life Movement cannot support bestowing this much power to the state and most oppose ALL health care reform efforts that include the Federal government. It is na?ve to believe Federalized health care will not lead to Federally-funded abortions and assisted-suicides.

  • JDidSaint

    In the Catholic Church, this is a day of holy obligation (must attend mass.) What are we celebrating? THE FEAST OF THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION.

    A Kennedy wrote a piece about the Church setting aside its pro-life stance on a feast day for the flawless conception of Mary in the womb. There are so many things wrong with that I have no idea how to start. First, I wouldn’t bring up abortion when people are thinking about the mother of God. If there is one thing people with a strong devotion to Mary can agree on it’s that the greatest evil in the world is abortion. Second, to do it on a day that celebrates the conception of anyone is confusing – why celebrate conception if they’re not a person until the last day of the ninth month? And finally, the fact that we are celebrating Mary’s birth as a perfect innocent (without a need for baptism) adds a whole new level of insanity to this article. Aborted children are not baptized – this leads to some sticky metaphysical discussion about their final resting place in the Church that further exacerbates that abortion is the greatest evil.

    Only a Kennedy… Or a Kerry…

    • Uma Richie

      The Immaculate Conception is the Patroness of the United States.

      The feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe is coming up. Let’s see if the dems can blow it even more than Hillary did on her trip to Mexico.

    • http://www.veronicaestrada.com/ Veronica Estrada

      To not attend Mass is considered a mortal sin.

      Oh! I wouldn’t know that —because I don’t attend Church–.

      Abortion a mortal sin?

      Oh! I wouldn’t know that –because I’m not catechized–,

      There are plenty of Christians who are pro-life — and, of course, are not obligated to know that not attending church is a mortal sin — because they are NOT CATHOLIC.

      • JDidSaint

        My point was that, if Ms. Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, as a Catholic, is going to tell a panel of Catholic bishops that they’re “being Catholic wrong” because they don’t approve of baby slaughter, she might want to do it on a day that they aren’t contemplating the immaculate conception of Mary.

        I didn’t mean to slight non-Catholic Christians or Catholics who didn’t know it was a feast day – I’m certainly not one to judge (note: the JDid is supposed to translate as “Jaded”.) My point is, if you are going to profess to know Roman Catholicism better than a group of Catholic Bishops, you might want to know the dark irony you’re committing.

  • pirate55

    As a Conservative Catholic, I too agree the Bishop’s position on health care is far too broad and accomodating particularly as it relates to illegal immigrants. We cannot allow such accomodation. I agree though well intentioned, the bishops are misguided in thinking American has the financial ability to do this.

    The former Lieutenant Governor of Maryland and member of the elitist Kennedy family should not dare to call herself a practicing Catholic for in doing so she distorts truth once again, as a member of the liberal left. What is her basis for suggesting that millions of American Catholics are pro-abortion rights? What data does this woman possess? I know there are people like her who think they are members of the ROMAN CATHOLIC faith but they are what are commonly referred to as “Cafeteria Catholics” or those who pick and choose what they believe in.

    Unlike this great country, Roman Catholicism IS NOT a democracy nor should it be, nor do I think I know of too many democratic theocracies. (Or is that an oxymoron) When speaking to life, either abide by the Church’s position or leave the cafeteria and go to another which accomodates you. Yes, Ms. Kennedy-Townsend. You heard me. Leave our Church and take your mistaken beliefs somewhere else. Do not dare speak for me as a Catholic or as a citizen of this great country! Respect Life!

    And when it comes to protecting our borders from illegal immigration I am sure the Church would not advocate breaking of American law. They had better not!

    It’s about time our bishops ignore the Kennedy money and pay attention to the Kennedy distortions. It is also about time for bishops to understand the strongest and most generous of your base are CONSERVATIVE CATHOLICS. DO NOT DRIVE THEM AWAY! Yes, Ms. Kennedy-Townsend, we are also “Tea Partiers” as you call them and very proud to be! And while you’re at it share this with the Congressman from Rhode Island.

    • http://www.veronicaestrada.com/ Veronica Estrada

      If not, I would not be so sure state your recommendations on Church governance in a public forum.

  • Marcus_Traianus

    Being a Catholic means, well, you follow church doctrine. That would be the tenets of our religion which make you a Catholic. Obviously, this is hard to understand for someone like Kathleen and other liberals who builds temples to themselves.

    I don’t take any of the Kennedy’s religious diatribes seriously because in a definitive sense they are not really Catholics. That would be due to the fact they stopped adhering to church doctrine years ago. Perhaps they are members of some other offshoot which follows principals stating that killing the unborn is just swell? But that does not include Catholicism.

    Funny how their cocktail of doctrine and politics is just fine and defensible. Yet the Church stands firm on one tenet and they get blasted by this intellectual lightweight? Sorry, this is not a buffet table honey.

    By the way, if the church wants to stand firm on issues of life which are directly related to doctrine- fine with me. However, they should stay out of the general debate about the limits of government, egregious taxation (Oh the irony), overstepping their constitutional limits, destroying the private healthcare industry, destroying the quality of healthcare, etc., etc. since it suits their social proclivities. I have yet to see how they methodically reconcile all these issues directly with our doctrine.

    • http://www.veronicaestrada.com/ Veronica Estrada

      “I have yet to see how they methodically reconcile all these issues directly with our doctrine.”

      They can’t because America is “no longer a Christian nation” (my paraphrase), let alone, a Catholic country.

      One could study papal encyclicals to cover the issues you mentioned.

      But, for me, I’m satisified with the understanding that the government is run by a bunch of godless humanists and amoral relativists.

      Their laws will always conflict with God’s.

  • http://www.veronicaestrada.com/ Veronica Estrada

    Sez that woman:

    “There are millions of pro-abortion rights Catholics who understand that women faced with unintended pregnancies or complications in wanted pregnancies have to make difficult, complex decisions for themselves and their families”

    Can she substantiate this claim?

    Probably not.

    IF she could, she would probably be drawing it from 2/3 of self-professed Catholics who don’t attend Church and are therefore, not obedient to the Church’s teachings.

    The Church teaches it’s a mortal sin not to attend Mass. If they aren’t in line with this creedo, then we can’t expect them to be in line about abortion, either.

    Nor can we properly call them “Catholic.”

    Many politicians, like that woman calls on the Catholic Church out of convenience. The rest of the time, they scream at the top of their lungs “separation of church and state!!”

    Which may explain the Church’s “slow” response to this socialized healthcare.

    Speaking of response — why is this just laid at the Catholic Church’s feet? Catholics only make up less than 25% of the close to 80% American Christians. http://religions.pewforum.org/reports

    Where are the rest of the heads of Christian churches in America on this issue?

    • pirate55

      That many should “cease their silence” on this issue and truly follow their beliefs. As to your comments about would I dare tell the bishops not to break our laws, ………….of course I would and I HAVE! I also as a member speak honestly and truthfully as to Church governance, particularly as it relates to law. But this is as far as I go in this forum

    • fisk2521

      The original activists support Roe v Wade also made up the facts…. “thousands dying from back street abortions”. It turns out it was absolutely unture.

      This tactic is used over and over by the left….. she’s irrelevant.

  • Scope

    the Bishops have inserted themselves into the health care debate by calling for a national health insurance scheme – including their call for it to cover illegal aliens – that may be well-intentioned but will have many dire practical consequences, and which confuses the individual duty of Christian charity with the power to compel others to give to Caesar. These are not problems of Catholic doctrine, they are problems of practical economics and practical politics, two areas in which the Bishops do not have the most sterling record.

    I had typed a comment on this exact same thing in BC’s diary of today, but, decided to not post it. I was sure I would be ostracized for saying such an uncharitable thing against the Catholic Bishops. I’m glad you said it, and, so much better than I ever could.

    • Dan McLaughlin

      as I must, on matters of theology. I’m not quarreling with any of that here, only the manner of its implementation as public policy.

  • fisk2521

    Katheleen Kennedy Townsend was Lt. Gov. when I lived in Maryland. When the DC sniper was randomly murdering people across the state, her official recommendation was to ’round up everyone’s guns street by street. Now when a reasonable person reflects on that profound solution, you end up with this: Two men who hated the US and its citizens were be amply armed and continue to murder those people that would now be unarmed to protect themselves at all. Really….. would anyone take her advice on anything?

    She needs to have a revisit from Grandma Rose Kennedy (seance seance) to learn what being a Catholic means. Apparently Ted had no idea, nor does she. Kathleen like many has lost her way from Christianity but there are many churches out there today whose “leaders’ agree with her….. the Unitarian, Church of Christ, Lutheran, Presbyterian and of course, the “Church of What’s Happening now”, Episcopal Church come to mind.

    • Richard Mullins

      Sorry but we think that way. I think you meant the United Church of Christ(I don’t like being lumped in with them).

  • student

    The fetus is alive. The fetus is genetically human. Abortion kills the fetus. The only question is when the fetus becomes considered to be a human being and the abortion becomes murder. There are several obvious potential decision points – conception (time zero), implantation (time about 3 days), development of a nervous system (time about 8 weeks), quickening (development of an independent heartbeat and potential viability, about 22 weeks), onset of dreaming (24 weeks), viability with current technology (about 27 weeks), passage through the birth canal (variable but usually 32 weeks plus). Wherever one puts the time point for the fetus becoming a human being, abortion becomes murder. There are people who think that the spatial translocation down the birth canal is the magic event (presumably the translocation past the uterine wall with C-sections is equivalent) and who are therefore comfortable with the Chinese government’s policy of injecting hypertonic saline into the brain of the fetus to kill it during birth in cases where the birth violates the one child policy or the US equivalent of crushing the head of the fetus as it delivers then tearing it to pieces as it is born (partial birth abortion) – but actually the vast majority of people in the US disagree and put the decision point earlier. The point is that wherever someone in their own best judgment and conscience puts the decision point – abortion after that point is murder. What I don’t get is how anybody – Democrat or other – can be comfortable with the idea of using state power (the government gun in the form of the IRS and other tax authorities) to force people to pay for other people to decide to commit an act (have an abortion) at a timepoint they consider to be murder. This seems an absolute rape of the concept of freedom of conscience. If a person pays for their own abortion then at least they are not using government force to coerce unwilling people into supporting what they see as a crime. I just do not get the moral basis that Kennedy claims to use the force of Caesar to compel others to be complicit in the crime.

  • gimlet

    that the most prominent Catholic politicians in this country are leading the charge for abortion. Pelosi, Kerry, McCaskill, Sibelius…all champion something directly opposed to their own religion, and yet (afaik) no one has called them on it. Is it too much to hope for that their bishops will grow a pair, and soon?

  • LDahl752

    should be used for only the purposes the Constitution originally intended. Yet, today we pay for everything — from helping people buy a new car to helping cities fund any number of projects that benefit only that city. The states have abdicated their own responsibilities, perfectly content to accept federal dollars because of their own budget problems. Yet, there is such a massive burden on states, cities and individuals there just doesn’t seem to be way to reverse this. If governments at all levels were cut by 10%/year for the next five years, maybe there would be hope. The larger the government, the less freedom we have.

    The more involved the central government is in public schools, the worse they are. Sorry, this has nothing to do with Kennedy’s diatribe about funding abortions with taxpayer money; but, all of the intrusions into private lives, using my tax dollars to do so, are related indicative of a government totally out of control.

  • john_barry

    Any Catholic who promotes abortion commits a grave sin against the Law of God and excommunicates himself/herself. Any Catholic who in any way aids a woman to have an abortion is automatically excommunicated. Similarly any Catholic woman who has an abortion is automatically excommunicated. The Kennedys worship at the altar of Liberalism. Abortion is the work of Satan. Kathleen Kennedy Townsend has set herself against the Law of God.