UPDATE: Father Reese gives his analysis
Catholic bishops split on how to deal with Biden
Archbishop Jose Gomez, as president of U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, tried to speak for all the bishops. He ended up creating more controversy.
The Vatican diplomatic service is idealistic in its goals but realistic in its approach to nations, including the United States. It looks for areas of agreement where it can work with other governments rather than look for fights.
It’s not always apparent, in part because everyone likes to see a fight. One U.S. ambassador to the Holy See described a meeting between a Democratic secretary of state and the Vatican where they spent almost all the time on areas of common interest. As they were walking out the door, the Vatican official said, “You know, of course, that in the press release we will have to mention our disagreement over abortion.”
The media focused on this one sentence of the press release, not knowing that abortion was not even discussed.
John Allen gives his analysis
Mixed messages on Biden reveal not just competing camps, but divided hearts
Cupich also appeared to issue a warning that he’s not prepared to just let this go, saying the “internal institutional failures involved must be addressed.”
So, today we have three groups, not just two, at odds within the Catholic power structure: The Vatican, the leadership of the USCCB, and an increasingly influential cluster of bishops who dissent from that leadership.
America gives a fine summary of various bishop's statements on this issue
In rare rebuke, Cardinal Cupich criticizes USCCB president’s letter to President Biden
From NCR
Dueling statements from US bishops, pope on Inauguration Day
From America
Pope Francis sends greeting to President Biden, contrasting with sharper message from head of U.S. bishops
Pope Francis’ warm message contrasted with the public statement that had been prepared by Archbishop José Gomez in the name of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. While the bishops’ statement included much the pope would agree with, it nevertheless adopted a confrontational tone over the issue of abortion especially, as well as contraception, marriage and gender. The Vatican only learned of the U.S.C.C.B. message hours before it was due to be released, and a senior Vatican official told America that “it was reasonable to say” that it had intervened but did not confirm or deny the details first reported by The Pillar.
There was a negative reaction from Vatican officials contacted by America in Rome to the statement issued by Archbishop Gomez in the name of the U.S.C.C.B. “It is most unfortunate and is likely to create even greater divisions within the church in the United States,” a senior official, who did not wish to be named because of the position he holds at the Vatican, told America.
Sources told America that it is unclear what consultation was conducted within the U.S. church before the statement was issued. Indeed, America has learned that the Vatican was taken by surprise at the statement. It seems that there is no precedent in recent memory of the conference issuing such a statement on Inauguration Day.
From Whispers in the Loggia
Tweets from Rocco
Amid rumblings of Vatican agita over USCCB’s abortion-heavy challenge to Biden on his Inauguration (https://bit.ly/3qJirKd), Card Blase – US’ lone member of Cong for Bishops – voices the fury of bench’s “Francis bloc” by publicly blasting +Gomez’s “ill-considered statement”:
Joe Biden has a picture of Pope Francis on his desk.
Amid ongoing blowback over Inauguration Day’s abortion swipe at the new POTUS, USCCB released no less than 4 formal statements this morning praising several of Biden’s Day One Exec Orders, citing US’ return to Paris Agreement on climate, DACA boost & nixing of Trump’s Muslim ban.
A quote from this article in America:
ReplyDelete"Cardinal Cupich, a key U.S. ally of Pope Francis, said that the statement was drafted without input from the conference’s administrative committee, “a collegial consultation that is [the] normal course for statements that represent and enjoy the considered endorsement of the American bishops.”
Looks like Archbishop Gomez stepped on some toes.
No, he stepped in caca all the way up to his rodillas. The stink will stay with him for a long time!
DeleteThere are some good comments from readers at the end of the article I linked in the previous comment. This one by John McGlynn is worth reading:
ReplyDelete"... There's a time and a place for everything, and this was neither. While I do not know Mr. Biden personally, I trust he fully understands the Church's position on these issues. That said, Mr. Biden is also the President of the United States, and he is bound to uphold the Constitution, the law, and the will of the people... a people that have not yet come to any consensus on these issues that would be considered in line with Catholic teaching. Not only that, the Church herself, especially the USCCB, has failed in her duty to considerately catechize the people in an effort to draw consensus on these issues. Beating Church teaching into the faithful with a club has never been a successful model, and even worse when trying to gain the consensus of non-Catholics as well. You can't, nor should you, legislate morality without the consensus of the governed, and I think Mr. Biden understands this better than the USCCB. You can't preach abortion as a crime without also addressing the equity of women's rights, education, healthcare, poverty, physical and emotional abuse, and all the other causes that bring desperate women to seek abortion. And without substantial input from women on these issues, the Church's moral authority here is meaningless."
I agree that the occasion calls for a certain amount of courtesy.
ReplyDeleteWhen a pope greets a president, it can - probably should - be understood as one head of state greeting another. Of course, a pope is much more than a head of state, but as a head of state, he is constrained by the norms of diplomatic courtesy. As another example of this courtesy, please take a look at the greeting he sent President Trump in 2017. A close side-by-side comparison between it and his greeting to Biden would be interesting; my brief glance suggests that the two cover much the same ground.
https://www.cnn.com/2017/01/20/politics/pope-letter-trump-trnd/index.html
Was Gomez's letter issued, as Gerard O'Connell characterized it in America Magazine, "in the name of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops"? Well ... I would have to say, No. Or at least, Not exactly. It is written in the first person singular throughout (although that is complicated by his frequent references to the teachings of the bishops' conference, for which he uses the first person plural), and is signed only by him. To be sure, it is signed in his dual capacity as archbishop of Los Angeles and President of the USCCB. But nowhere, in expressing his well-wishes, his hopes, his concerns and so on, does he claim to be speaking for anyone but himself. Perhaps, appearing as a media release on the USCCB website, its status is a little ambiguous. FWIW, I read it as coming from him, rather than attempting to speak for the conference as a whole.
Count me as not among those rushing to embrace the president as a shining paragon of Catholicism. Like most of us, he probably is more comfortable with some aspects of our faith than others. Unlike most of us, he is in a position to enact policies and influence and enforce government actions which can have an effect on millions of human beings. I shall like it when his presidency is supportive of the church's mission and teachings, and I shall dislike it when it isn't. I daresay this is the same standard which many readers of America, NCR and Commonweal applied to, say, William Barr and Brett Kavanaugh, and I don't know of a reason that President Biden should be held to a lower standard.
How does denying communion work, anyway? If a priest or deacon refuses to give communion to someone in the line, do they shake their heads, put their hand over the Hosts or cup? Do they say something aloud? Is the point to do it quietly or make an example of someone?
DeleteI was told by the Church Ladies that I had lapsed and not to present myself until I had been to communion until I had been to Confession. It's now been 15 years.
If they are EM'ing and I did get in line, would they ask me if I had been to confession?
How would a priest or deacon know Biden had not confessed his sins somewhere else before showing up to receive?
Would it be a sin to deny someone communion because you assumed he had not received absolution?
Just idly wondering how this all works.
Is anyone else missing the "delete" button? Missing on my tablet and PC. I wonder if a setting needs to be changed. I noticed an editing error above and can't delete and repost with corrections.
DeleteJean, yes, I am also missing a delete button.
DeleteJim, yes, I know Biden isn't up for canonization. I just find it problematic that Archbishop Gomez and companions found it necessary to form a working group to figure out how they were going to interact with him as president, when they didn't apparently think it was necessary with the most problematic president in history.
DeleteAnd then the archbishop proceeds to issue a 1200 word letter of "congratulations" in which he mostly rides the culture war hobby horses. Especially abortion. And did he mention that abortion is still the preeminent priority? And there are other social issues too. But abortion.
The place where I am reading Archbishop Gomez' letter is on the USCCB site, the equivalent of "their" letterhead. The title is "USCCB President's Statement..." That might be why some other members of the conference, such as Cardinal Cupich, feel that collegiality had not been observed.
To Jean's question about denying someone Communion, it is my worthless opinion that it shouldn't be up to any ordinary or extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist unless the person in question was under a formal sentence of excommunication or had publicly renounced their faith.
DeleteEven then, how are most people going to know that, especially church ladies?
I'm also missing the delete button. Also, it seems that, for my own posts, the edit button (a pencil at the bottom of the post) no longer is available. If I want to patch up something in my own posts, I have to pretend to start a new post, then close the new post, and then edit the other post in the list of posts which comes up.
DeleteKatherine - I don't think you're wrong in how you characterized Gomez's letter. It was kind of bad form for the occasion. I don't think it hit the bulls-eye.
DeleteI do think there is a sort of full court press going on at the moment, on the part of the more liberal-ish Catholic media outlets and commentators, to enshrine Biden as a Catholic For Our Times. It's one stream in the overall bootlicking tendency among the liberal-ish mainstream media since Jan 20. To be sure, I share everyone's sense of relief, and also everyone's well-wishes to the new president.
FWIW, I had a conversation with my wife last night. She mentioned something which is very understandable: she perceives Gomez's letter as an attack on Biden by a Republican, or someone sympathetic to Republicans and therefore against Democrats. Thus, according to this view, Gomez had a sort of veiled partisan motive for issuing the letter, and the content of the letter itself is manifestly insincere. I concede that it's entirely possible Gomez is conservative in his politics. Nevertheless, I think we also should extend him a certain amount of courtesy, in taking his message as offered - as truthfully expressing what he thinks. I think it's likely that, in writing the letter, he tried to offer authentic Catholic witness. He's sort of in John the Baptist mode, calling out the brood of vipers. Maybe that's "out of season" for the occasion; it isn't the approach I would have taken.
Jean - I'm not comfortable denying anyone communion, for some of the reasons you mention - especially, How is the communion minister supposed to know? My personal view is, the responsibility belongs to the communicant (i.e. the person who either gets in line or doesn't get in line for communion).
DeleteI don't want to deny communion to anyone who approaches. If the president's conscience tells him that he's able to receive, then, to coin a phrase: Who am I to judge?
I wasn't directing this at you particularly, Jim, though I believe you once said you would be comfortable not giving communion to Sen. Durbin. I just wonder how it works when priests DO decide they can't give communion.
DeleteHow do the Church Ladies know? Haha! They know everything. Just ask them.
“When a pope greets a president, it can - probably should - be understood as one head of state greeting another. Of course, a pope is much more than a head of state, but as a head of state, he is constrained by the norms of diplomatic courtesy.”
ReplyDeleteThe Pope has a unique ministry not only in the Church but in the World. That ministry in the World began long before the Vatican City State emerged. The papal diplomatic service is centuries old. Look at the role that Francis has played in the Environment not only through teaching but also on the diplomatic front. In the Paris accords many third world countries were very influenced by the Pope, In fact his encyclical played a great political role rather than just being an internal teaching document.
Trump obviously was completely uncooperative with the Vatican on the political issues that are on its table, e.g. the environment and migration. Biden offers a great opportunity for the Vatican to cooperate with the US in these areas.
The stupidity of Gomez to think that he could try in his own name as the head of the bishops’ conference to define the relationship of the Church to the Biden administration without collaborating with either the Vatican or with all his fellow bishops is unbelievable. Quite frankly he, like Chaput and Vigano, is suffering from the desire to be a cardinal. And since they have been rebuffed by Rome and have less support among the bishops because of Francis appointees, they have all been reduced to getting media attention. As media figures they will inevitably end up contributing to the division in America and the American Church. They have failed to heed Francis call for unity, the reason why he had them all go to Mundelein for a retreat. Instead the disunion of the American bishops is just increasing and becoming increasing visible.
“Count me as not among those rushing to embrace the president as a shining paragon of Catholicism.” But the issue is not whether Biden, Pelosi, the Catholic Supreme Court Justices are all shining paragons of Catholicism. As Francis says, including himself “We are all sinners.” That especially needs to be clear in the case of these bishops who are pursuing their own selfish political agendas. Rather they should be in your words contributing to the Common Good by moving toward unity in Church and State rather than disunity and division.
It seems to me unfair to critique Biden for not using the Common Good as an explicit model, even when he is doing a good job of promoting the Common Good in his speeches and actions, and then fail to see how terribly the right wing bishops are failing to promote the Common Good in our Church and Country.
Hi Jack - to be clear, my critique (and it was really just an observation) wasn't about Biden, it was about Fr. Kevin O'Brien's homily.
DeleteHe's only been president for about three days so far - it's too early to render any judgment yet :-)
Fwiw, I fully expect the president to be a president who looks to the Common Good. I think he's very much from the New Deal tradition, and the New Deal, whatever its merits as policy, was offered in a spirit which is consonant with the spirituality of the Common Good.
I can't speak to the aspirations of Gomez, Chaput et al. Both of those guys could reasonably have expected to have been made cardinals - there is plenty of precedent for it. I guess, if it doesn't rankle at least a little bit, they're not human. If Francis could increase peace and unity in the church by making them cardinals, do you think he should do it?
Making them cardinals would be a nice peace offering. On the other hand they are young enough to be electors the next time a papal election comes up. Sure, make them cardinals. For an 80th birthday present.
DeleteTo the above I would add that I don't actually mind them being electors. I would mind very much any of them being pope.
DeleteThey are not likely to be cardinals simply because they are responsible for much division and disunity in the church when Francis has made it very clear that he wants the American bishops to come together and find a way forward that gets them out of politics. Francis thinks politics is a noble calling for laity but not for bishops.
DeleteFrancis agenda on making cardinals is to get away from the pursuit of honors and make it a service obligation instead. He is a Jesuit. A large part of Ignatian spirituality is not to seek honors. They are supposed to reject being made a bishop or a cardinal. Its in the Rule. After a Jesuit is given an office such as novice master, rector of a house, or provincial, they don't get promoted. Their next assignment might well be to a parish or teach in a school or wherever else they are needed.
I think his dismantling of the promotion system in the Church, i.e. the expectation that you become bishop, get promoted to archbishop, then cardinal may one day be seen as great contribution as B16 dismantling the idea that pope's don't retire.
The older I get the better Anglicanism looks.
DeletePerhaps Biden is not a"paragon" of Catholicism as the elected President, but should he be?
ReplyDeleteIt appears that to some, Catholics really do not have primacy of conscience when it comes to selected teachings. But there is not a Catholic in the entire world that accepts ALL of them. Also some Catholics fail to distinguish between choices made as a Catholic and one's obligations as the elected representative of ALL the people - most of whom are pro-choice and most of whom are not Catholic. It is not up to politicians to impose Catholic teaching on all Americans.
Biden may not be a "paragon" of Catholicism, but he does seem to be a genuine Christian, unlike trump.
Too many Catholics (and christians in general) don't seem to actually follow Jesus' teachings - they proclaim their faith on their sleeves while acting in a manner that is totally contrary to Christ's teachings.
Anne, good point about the obligations of an elected official representing all the people being different from personal ones as a Catholic.
DeleteI do think that it is Biden's Catholicism that makes him more of a "special case" for the bishops than Trump, Obama, Bush and Clinton were.
DeleteCardinal Ratzinger wrote a letter to Cardinal McCarrick (but, in reality, to the entire USCCB) back in 2004 which addresses the question of politicians who promote abortion. It's surprisingly uncompromising. I don't claim it's the final word on the subject, but it is, literally, the last (most recent) authoritative word I'm aware of. It doesn't give President Biden much wiggle room.
https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/worthiness-to-receive-holy-communion-general-principles-2153
We're all aware of the fresh breeze, the merciful spirit which Francis has brought into the church since that time. I don't think Francis would write the same letter today that Ratzinger did 17 years ago.
So where does that leave us? I guess it leaves us more or less where the bishops seem to be: some of them continue to cling to the guidance and the spirituality evident in the Ratzinger letter. And some others (including, I think, my own leader, Cardinal Cupich, for whose leadership I don't give prayers of thanksgiving nearly as much as I should) are discerning a different spirit and different approach today.
And the lack of uniformity we see among the bishops, I think we can also see among the people as as whole. Jean's church ladies exasperate me no end, but they are not isolated. They are representative of many, many American Catholics who are genuinely affronted when a Catholic politician works to make abortions easier to obtain, as though they are a positive good.
Ensuring that abortion is safe, which includes making it available, is not the same as seeing it as "good." And I will leave it at that.
DeleteCan't help thinking about Catholic Supreme Court justices who stayed up until the wee hours to clear the way for federal executions.
DeleteKatherine - right, those death penalty cases are difficult, and I am not entirely sure what to think about how Catholic officials should respond when the cases come across their desks. I know William Barr was criticized for collaborating with the Trump Administration's uptick in executions.
DeleteFWIW, that Ratzinger letter from 2004 which I referenced elsewhere said two interesting things about the death penalty: that it is not a "pre-eminent" issue like abortion; and that there are times when it is permissible. In noting these things, I think he was more or less recapping conventional Catholic moral thought. Since then, Francis has 'developed' the church's teaching on the death penalty. But one doesn't know whether these adult Catholic officials are aware of that development; nor whether they have accepted the developed teaching; nor whether they may have some other reason for proceeding anyway, in spite of the developments in teaching. In addition, I think it's fairly common for judges to be required to enforce laws and follow sentencing guidelines which they don't believe are entirely just - it's sort of a hazard that comes with the job. Perhaps they could do more to resist than they do.
Yeah, I understand the part about judges being obliged to enforce the law, even though they may not feel it to be entirely just. But it seemed like they were in an unseemly hurry to ram the death penalty cases through before the clock ran out on the Trump administration.
DeleteI believe that the church's teaching on the death penalty was that it was based on the right of self defense or the defense of others. As far as Francis ( and at least his previous two predecessors) "evolving" the teaching, it is my impression that it is based on the ability of modern societies to keep criminals who have committed murder imprisoned so that they are not a danger to society; that in most cases self-defense no longer requires the death penalty.
When Biden announced that he was running for President, I was sure that if he was nominated that he would loose because he would loose the vote of Catholics because some Bishops would question his Catholicism. I checked the latest figures and it appears that Biden won the Catholic vote by 2 percentage points whereas in 2016 the Catholic vote was split between Clinton and Trump.
ReplyDeleteI had not anticipated the pandemic. I think that basically washed out any real focus upon Biden's Catholicism by the Bishops. The ones who questioned it didn't make a dent in the news cycle. I suspect the same thing is likely to happen with Gomez. Only the Catholic news media is interested in the political comments of bishops. The rest of the country is not.
I don't know whether the bishops have much practical influence when it comes to voting. As you note, most people aren't very aware of what bishops say and do, unless a bishop manages to break into the mainstream news cycle for one reason or another (and during the last few decades, that seems to result in negative publicity as often as positive publicity).
DeleteAmong those who do pay attention to Catholic media, my guess is that for every person who is disposed to defer to his/her bishop on matters of public affairs, there is one (or more) who is disposed to ignore or flout the bishop. Basically, I think people listen to their bishops when it suits their predispositions.
Catholic clergy who minister in individual parishes are forbidden to endorse candidates or parties, or campaign on politicians' behalves, in the exercise of our ministry. Some do so anyway, but at least around here, not many do.
My personal view is that, when priests or deacons are ideological in their preaching and/or the exercise of their ministry, "sorting" takes place: people who don't agree with the cleric's views leave the parish for a less ideological (or more ideologically friendly) parish; while those who already agree with the cleric are attracted to him and cluster in that parish. Then one ends up with a conservative parish or a liberal parish. In my view, that process and outcome are pastorally unhealthy.
I've learned through experience over the years that talking about controversial current events in a homily usually wins me some fans and also earns me some enemies. (But there are times when it must be done.) I would never talk about a political race or endorse one candidate or party, but as soon as a hot topic is broached, people's political "filters" activate, and they process what is said accordingly.
A couple of years ago, I said some positive things about Greta Thunberg in a homily - because I think she is a modern-day prophet on a topic (climate change) which Francis is trying to raise awareness about. But she is a polarizing figure, and people reacted according to their preconceptions about her, rather than what I actually said about her. The negative feedback I received bore little or no relation to anything I had actually said; they just heard "Greta" and immediately their brains started following the pre-wired paths.
Nevertheless, Catholics are still so numerous that in some local or statewide races, they are a demographic that can swing a vote one way or another. Here in the upper Midwest, the conservative Catholic vote can matter sometimes in a close local or stateside race. Perhaps the same is true of liberal Catholics in some urban areas.
Jim, I think you are right about ideological preaching being unhealthy for a parish, and leading to "sorting". I am profoundly grateful to our pastor that he has never given political homilies, other than general advice to vote with an informed conscience. If I had to guess I'd say that he probably is pretty conservative politically, but also that he dislikes lying intensely (and I don't really have to guess about that). Most of our parishioners are pretty private about politics, though I know from the demographics of our county that most of them are Republicans. I am grateful to all of them that we can keep church as a "safe zone". This year especially, we all need a safe zone.
DeleteI read about the priest in Chicago who addressed the riot in his homily and ended up with people walking out. I probably would agree with what he said. But do we really need anyone to tell us how awful it was from a moral and civil point of view? I wouldn't have walked out, but I would have gone home afterwards and popped some Excedrin because politics in church gives me such a headache.
Biden is the second Catholic president. He has a bully pulpit possibly louder than the bishops. Some of them probably don't like this and sounded off to put the Catholic leader of a secular entity in his place and mark their turf.
ReplyDeleteBut I haven't heard Biden sound off on abortion since his election. He will make some pro-abortion executive orders related to abortion availability and foreign aid. Personally, I don't like my tax money being used to support abortion not related to medical problems, or rape or incest. But I don't like my tax money being used for military adventurism either. If I withheld on one, I'd have to withhold on the other.
During Trump's tenure, can one say that any fetal humans were saved? If any, probably not nearly as many as the fully grown humans we lost to coronavirus, including one of our own beloved participants.
The anti-Biden bishops need to cool it a little. I am relieved that a normal human being is president and instituting real federal efforts to address the pandemic. I am relieved for myself and many I know who are in "the zone", including the other folks on this forum.
Those bishops bet on the wrong horse, a rabid horse. The proponents of the prolife cause didn't do it any favors by attaching it to a complete idiot. They are digging themselves into a deeper hole.
"Those bishops bet on the wrong horse, a rabid horse. The proponents of the prolife cause didn't do it any favors by attaching it to a complete idiot. They are digging themselves into a deeper hole." Stanley, I agree with that. And I too am very relieved to have a normal human being as president. He doesn't have to be a saint or an angel, but "decent" is a good thing.
Delete