What do you guys think of this? (From http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/?p=808 )
The word competence has several meanings, most of which congregate around ability and authority. It is not clear which meaning is pertinent to the announcement that the national bishops conference will be meeting with congressional Democrats who are Catholics in order to devise a way to withdraw troops from Iraq in what is described as a “responsible transition.” A week later, presumably in order to underscore their bipartisanship, it was announced that the bishops would be meeting also with Catholic Republicans.
I have no problem with Bishops meeting with politicians to discuss any issue of concern, be that war, abortion, health care or immigration. Bishops are citizens too and have every right to lobby their Representatives. What troubles me about this initiave however is the fact that they are meeting solely with Catholic members which would lead me to believe that they are intending to use some sort of religious or doctrinal leverage to make their case. IMHO this crosses the line, at least blurs the line between Church and State.
When it comes to policy issues Representatives are Representatives first, Catholics, Episcopalians, Baptists, Muslims or Jews second.
I have no problem with Bishops meeting with politicians to discuss any issue of concern, be that war, abortion, health care or immigration. Bishops are citizens too and have every right to lobby their Representatives.
Bishops are citizens, too, and have a right to lobby their reps, yes. But they aren’t acting here as citizens, they’re acting as the hierarchy of the Catholic Church. And probably of greater concern to me is that they aren’t merely lobbying their reps, they’re meeting with them, obstensibly, to make policy. I think it’s one thing to advocate for peace and/or justice, and to encourage the members of their flock to vote their Catholic principles in such matters. It’s another thing for the bishops to meet with government officials to make specific policy.
And I agree with you that meeting only with the Catholic Democrats (oh, and as an afterthought, Catholic Republicans.) is problematical.
The rest of that linked essay was pretty good, Matt. You might be interested.
I still have no problem with the Church lobbying its position. That does not cross the line so long as the legislator being lobbied is a legislator first and a Catholic second. IN that case the separation between Church and State remains…the Church is just another pressure group making its case.
Where the line is crossed is when a legislator puts his religious beliefs or his religious allegiance ahead of his beliefs in his country or his allegience to its government. THe Church has sailed very close to the wind on several occasions in the past…threatening to excommunicate or refusing to serve communion to elected representatives who for example may have voted for an abortion bill or a same sex marriage bill. This would appear to be another such case because they are meeting with just Catholic legislators and one can only assume to make “Catholic” arguments against the war. That troubles me.
What most Christians who would like to see their church play a more prominent role in government don’t understand is that the separation of church and state is there to protect the church as much as it is to protect the state…moreso in fact. Religious movements have much more to fear from a hostile government than the other way round.
OK, this doesn’t piss me off as much as the child molestation history, but it takes a serious try. Maybe they could first prove that they can govern their Church before they graduate.
Give unto Caesar.
Is there no end to the worthlessness of the leadership of the Catholic Church in America?
I don’t think this would have happened on Pope John Paul II’s watch, and I am surprised it is happening now.
Thanks for posting this.
**Maybe they could first prove that they can govern their Church before they graduate. **
Or as Nuehaus puts it:
**
*Kindly note that I have refrained from mentioning that the recent record of the bishops in governing the Church—where they do have competence (at least in the sense of authority)—is not so stellar as to warrant great confidence in their ability to conduct American foreign policy. *
**
**Is there no end to the worthlessness of the leadership of the Catholic Church in America? **
It’s an open question, as far as I can tell.
One significant issue here is that the Catholic Church is not an American institution. Even though these bishops are part of the “national bishops conference” they represent the policy aims of an international organization, based outside of this country, and not necessarily aligned with U.S. National interests.
I also agree with the concern about these bishops meeting only with Catholic Congressmen, especially in an official capacity. Although we have caucuses for lots of different groupings, it’s problematic when religion is the ideology that defines that grouping, if only from a public perception perspective.
I didn’t see it in the article, but are they also meeting with representatives of Iran, Sudan, AQ and North Korea?
‘‘Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’’ The United States Constitution, Amendment 1.
As long as they are not asking the representatives to make any laws respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, I don’t have a problem with it.