UK bishop "thrilled" by Obama's election ... or is he?

LifeSiteNews reports:

A British Catholic bishop has issued a statement enthusiastically welcoming the man who has been labelled the “most pro-abortion US president in history” – president-elect Barack Obama. Bishop Crispian Hollis of the Portsmouth diocese in southern England has said he is “thrilled” at the election of Obama.

The bishop’s message, posted on the website of the Portsmouth diocese, says, “With millions of others, I have been thrilled by Barack Obama’s victory and I thank God for it. For me, it represents a rare moment of hope and optimism which shows American democracy at its best and it is of seismic significance and potential for the whole global community. And so, more than ever now, he deserves and needs us to keep him in our prayers.”

This ardent welcome from Hollis, known in Britain to be on the extreme left of the Catholic Church, is in sharp contrast to a letter issued yesterday by the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, in which they warned Obama that “aggressive pro-abortion policies, legislation and executive orders will permanently alienate tens of millions of Americans, and would be seen by many as an attack on the free exercise of their religion.”

But an update from Damian Thompson:

Bishop Hollis has now "clarified" his message as follows:

I genuinely welcome [Mr Obama's] election because he represents such a different political profile from that of President Bush. America – and the world – needs that political change and will benefit from it.However, I am aware of what he has said about abortion and about the so-called freedom of choice and I deplore his words.

There is no way in which I endorse his position on these crucial “life” matters, nor, as a Catholic bishop, could I ever do so.Perhaps it’s naïve to say this but I hope and pray that the realities of the political process will mean that he has to temper his personal policies on these all important life issues and pay serious attention to the outrage with which many view his “life” agenda.

That's much better, though I don't think the Bishop should present his own party political views on a diocesan website. I'm glad he's deplored Obama's extreme pro-abortion opinions; I would have thought that he would have mentioned them in his original message, but maybe they slipped his mind.

Too bad, I was waiting for the pro-Obama Catholics to register their outrage at Bishop Hollis' brutal display of partisanship. Yawn.

Update: Biden receives Communion, Pelosi stands-up Niederauer

Catholic Vice-President Elect Joe Biden and Catholic Speaker Nancy Pelosi have the shared dishonor of being pro-abortion politicians who have earned the rebuke of dozens of American bishops for their misrepresentation of their faith in a textbook case of scandalizing the faithful.

So what are they up to now?

Joe Biden is still receiving Communion, most recently (that we know of) in Tallahassee FL the Sunday before election day. Local bishop John Ricard took swift action and warned Biden to examine his conscience carefully before approaching the altar again. But hey, when do we next expect Joe Biden to be in Florida? It's served his purpose

Biden's home bishop Francis Malooly, meanwhile, the person most responsible for the formation and discipline of his parishioners, won't tell him to stop, saying "I won't politicize the Eucharist ... I don't want to alienate people. I want to change their hearts and minds."

Now while that's surely a noble aim, I don't see any results. The penalties of the Church, however, can also serve to change hearts and minds. Let's not forget that. If laws are never enforced, people will feel free to ignore them.

Speaker Pelosi, meanwhile - also still presumably presenting herself for Communion - promised her local Archbishop George Niederauer to sit down with him about her situation after he invited her. That public promise was made 68 days, 21 hours and 27 minutes ago. How do I know that? I've had a timer running since the day she made her promise. It's still ticking.

That's right, for over two months, this "ardent, faithful" Catholic - who regularly uses her faith as credentials in the exercise of her public office - couldn't even find time to fit in a sit-down with her bishop on a matter which has received national attention, both within and outside the Catholic Church.

Again, I'm looking for signs that progress is being made, that the pre-chosen methods are working.

But I'm not seeing it.

Breaking: Bishops to present concerns on abortion, other issues to politicians

CNS - which has lots of coverage, follows the knotted thread:

With a new administration and a Democratic-dominated Congress about to take office, the U.S. bishops will spell out their concerns about policies and laws that might make abortion more readily available.

After a total of nearly three hours of discussion in public and private sessions Nov. 11 during their annual fall meeting, the bishops gave their president, Chicago Cardinal Francis E. George, a set of concerns about abortion and other matters to raise in a public statement he will issue on their behalf. The statement was to be completed for final approval Nov. 12.

Martino tries to get some movement:

Bishop Joseph F. Martino of Scranton, Pa., said though he realized the statement would not address that topic, "we are going to have to speak as firmly as possible to Catholic politicians who are not merely reluctant to vote pro-life, but are stridently anti-life." He noted that in ages past, U.S. bishops took canonical measures against Catholic politicians who supported institutional racism.

"We have to have something like that," he said. "I cannot have the vice president-elect (Joseph Biden) coming to Scranton (his childhood home) saying he learned his values there, when his values are utterly against the teachings of the Catholic Church."

The Church already does have "something like that." The laws are on the books, they're just not being used.

Tobin (!):

Bishop Thomas J. Tobin of Providence, R.I., said toward the end of the discussion that if the statement were to include everything heard in that session, "you might as well just reprint 'Faithful Citizenship,'" the bishops' 2007 document on political responsibility.

He said instead the final version should be concise, taking a lesson from Obama's own successful campaign strategy, which focused narrowly on change and hope.

"That carried him to the presidency," Bishop Tobin said. The bishops need to find a similar succinct approach, he said, "less political, less politically correct and more prophetic. We need somehow to reclaim the prophetic voice on this issue."

Though I agree with Tobin about "less political, less politically correct, and more prophetic" .... did I just catch a hint that he is admitting Obama reaches people better these days than the bishops themselves? What does it say that Obama can come across as more "prophetic" than bishops who are consecrated into the prophetic priesthood of Christ Himself?

Talk about a wake-up call.

Are pro-life dems making a "breakthrough"?

Tom McFeely has a most intersting post on NCRegister.com, my comments in bold:

Let’s face it, there weren’t very many pro-life silver linings among the electoral clouds that formed Tuesday evening over America. Agreed.

But here’s one: A record 31 Democratic Party pro-life candidates were elected to Congress.

According to Democrats for Life of America, five new Democratic pro-lifers were elected, joining 26 pro-life incumbents who were re-elected. Out of 58 total.

“This will be only the second time in 30 years that the number of pro-life Democrats increases instead of decreases,” Kristen Day, director of Democrats for Life of America, told Lifenews.com. “The first time we made gains was in 2006 due to the work of pro-life Democrats all over this country advocating on behalf of the pro-life cause.” DLA, not to be confused with "Catholic Democrats" - a front group

The first task confronting Congressional pro-lifers from both parties in the next Congress? Forging bipartisan alliances across the aisles of the Senate and the House of Representatives to prevent passage of the abortion lobby’s Freedom of Choice (FOCA) legislation. Most important, and some small encouragement.

I've said it before, "pro-life" and "democrat" can be a powerfully appealing combination to a Catholic. It's clear to me I need to learn more about Democrats for Life of America. What I've seen so far, I mostly like (i.e., "Pro-Life Is The Winning Strategy For Democrats", etc). Other things they have said, while I don't agree with entirely, are certainly far better than what we are used to hearing.

I know I would love to support pro-life candidates within the democrat party. After all, contrary to what you may hear, pro-life is not a partisan issue. The goal of true pro-life advocates is not to see republicans win, but to see human life preserved across party lines.

Sadly, it appears that the democrat party's leadership remains strongly committed to abortion rights, as is evident from their most recent party platform. What will it take to make these higher-ups realize that they need not be the "party of death", to quote the phrase of an archbishop?

Maybe Catholics electing more pro-life Democrats.

Picking up the pieces (recap post)

Yes, Barack Obama won 349-173, and by about 7 million votes nationally. The Senate is Democratic 56 to 40 with 4 seats undecided (still?!), but it's highly unlikely the Democrats will reach a super majority of 60. The House is Democratic 258-173, a gain of 17 at least.

Okay, on to ballot innitiatives....

• It looks like Prop 8 in CA - which would ban gay marriage in that state - will win. Arizona and Florida bans on Gay Marriage and Arkansas' ban on gay adoption also passed. Good news.
  
• Pro-life initiatives in Colorado, California and South Dakota have lost. Bad news.
  
• In Michigan, pro-embryonic stem cell research proposal 2 passed by 4%. More bad news.
  
• And Doctor-Assisted Suicide is now legal in Washington. Even more bad news.

So what happened? Anti-gay marriage legislation won .... pro-life legislation lost, and badly.

We've got our work cut out for us.

update: some early numbers on how Catholics voted...

• Catholics who attend Mass at least weekly went for McCain 54-45%.
• Catholics who attend Mass less than weekly went Obama 61-37%

What can we take from this? One obvious conclusion: Catholics who don't feel obligated (or desire) to attend Mass probably won't feel obligated (or desire) to inform their conscience either.

AMP NEWS Video - Episode One Featuring Archbishop Chaput Interview!

This week I sat down for an interview with Archbishop Charles Chaput of the Archdiocese of Denver to discuss his NYT bestseller Render Unto Caesar as well as Catholic voting in this election as part of my new collaborative project AMP NEWS.

Regular AmP readers will know that Archbishop Chaput has been one of the most (if not the most) vocal bishop defenders of the unborn in the American public scene of late, despite some criticism. God bless him for it.

Archbishop Chaput, I am thrilled to say, gave me frank answers to the tough questions that are facing American Catholics this election, and it is my hope my that many people will have a chance to see this interview before they vote on Tuesday.

Embedded below are the four segments of AMP NEWS Episode One. You may also watch the entire episode as a whole right here on YouTube. We hope to continue providing quality Catholic news, interviews, and offbeat programming to you in the future!

Episode 1 - "Headlines"

Episode 1 - "Papist Chat with Archbishop Chaput {Part 1 of 2}"


Episode 1 - "Papist Chat with Archbishop Chaput {Part 2 of 2}"


Episode 1 - "The Papist Takedown"

This link creates a playlist of the entire episode: http://tinyurl.com/ampnews

Now that you have seen the show, please forward these videos to your friends and family who are preparing to vote on Tuesday, and send AMP NEWS to folks who are seeking an informed, Catholic perspective on the important stories facing Catholics in America today. Please also subscribe to our AMP NEWS YouTube Channel if you want to be updated instantly when new episodes are uploaded.

Special thanks go to the Catholic Information Center in Washington DC (and do check out their upcoming events) for giving AMP NEWS the opportunity of interviewing Archbishop Chaput, to AMP NEWS producer Alex Buder, to William Newton for creative input, and our profound gratitude to His Excellency, Archbishop Charles Chaput O.F.M Cap, for his faithful service on behalf of Christ and His Church.

update, some pull quotes from the interview with Archbishop Chaput:

• On Barack Obama: "Senator Obama is the most active pro-abortion politician to run for the Presidency since Roe v. Wade. He has committed himself to do things the Church would resist."
• On vocal bishops: "The bishops are aware ... a quieter approach to these things has not been effective ... we have to be stronger in what we say. We've just had it."
• On Faithful Citizenship: "[It is] not very clear. We either ought to get rid of it, or say things much clearer."
• On claiming Obama is a pro-life candidate: "It would be foolish to say that someone who ... runs on a party platform that has no regret at all about abortion ... to call that position pro-life is really strange."
• On IRS investigations: "It's simply bullying. It shouldn't stop us from talking about the important issues of our time."
• On the separation of Church and State: "We do believe in it. We don't like the state to tell us what to do. We don't believe in the separation of faith and politics."

And here is a running tally of the blogs/websites that have picked up on AMP NEWS so far:

• National Catholic Register Daily
• Commonweal
• HuffingtonPost
• LifeNews
• CatholicVote.com
• LifeSiteNews
• Catholic Culture
• New Advent
• BeliefNet's Pontifications
• Catholic Key
• Ignatius Insight Scoop
• Inside Catholic
• The Curt Jester
• Catholic iPod
• The Blog of the Courtier
• Te Deum Laudamus
• Aggie Catholics
• Catholic Mountain
• Duc in Madison
• The Arbiter of Common Sense
• A Shepherd's Voice
• Lily Maiden
• Zappe.us
• Servant For Truth

If I left your name off the list please send me an email!

Leon Suprenant on the November meeting

Good words:

At their semi-annual meeting November 10-13th in Baltimore, the United States bishops will discuss the “practical and pastoral implications of political support for abortion.” Some might question the timing of this discussion, coming days after a national election featuring a candidate whom Princeton professor Robert George described as being the most extreme pro-abortion candidate ever to seek the presidency. At the same time, better (barely) late than never, and perhaps the timing will allow for a candid discussion relatively free of USCCB-speak (read “Faithful Citizenship”) or charges of partisanship.

In my own discussions with bishops regarding this issue in the weeks leading up to the November meeting, I have urged them to consider these three concerns.

Read them here.

It bears repeating: Bishops who speak, speak this way

At least in the overwhelming majority of cases. Bishops who are not adopting this strong rhetoric calling Catholics to vote an informed conscience on the issue, particularly, of abortion can be counted on one hand.

Another case in point to close-out the day: Bishop Robert Carlson of Saginaw whose statement (PDF) treats the presidential election as well as pro-ESCR Proposal 2 in Michigan (which I have discussed here).

Since I see no need to reduplicate work already done well, please see Fr. Z's analysis of the document.

Abp. of Omaha: "No proportionate reason outweights abortion"

As a perfect example of what I see as a clear and growing trend, I submit this letter on voting entitled "Deciding the values that are most important to us" (PDF) by Archbishop Elden Curtiss of Omaha.

The general framework of this letter, and other letters recently published by American bishops:

• Catholics have a moral responsibility to vote and participate in the democratic process
• Catholics have to vote according to a well-formed conscience - and that means well formed by Catholic principles, not ideological or partisan preconceived notions
• Catholics must vote to respect and preserve the dignity of every human life
• Among modern threats to that dignity, nothing matches the ongoing grave evil of abortion

What happens next is interesting, and novel, but again - it's happening more and more often....

After laying out the four steps above, the bishop will add a fifth step - his personal conclusion:

"I cannot conceive of a proportionate reason that could outweigh the deaths of nearly 50 million children killed by abortion."

"Those who do not understand or accept this basic human right [to life] are unworthy of our trust."

Of course, this is a great simplification. And Bishop Curtiss adds the needed qualifications:

"We are surely not one-issue people because we have to be concerned about the well-being of everyone in our society, and especially those who are hurting and in need. We have to be concerned about women with unplanned pregnancies who are without the resources to give birth or to care for their babies. We are rightfully concerned about candidates for public office who do not seem to care about babies after they are born and their mothers, and their future welfare. But the very first right we must protect, if all human rights are to be protected, is the right to life for the unborn."

Anyway, this is just no. 84 on a list of over 115.

Top 10 Faith Factors in the Election

Steven Waldman's list mentions Catholics in points 4 and 5:

4. Will Catholics Ignore Their Bishops?
The overall Catholic vote has gone with the popular vote winner every election since 1968. Catholic bishops have been urging Catholic voters to vote for antiabortion candidates, but a majority of Catholic voters now favor abortion rights so it remains to be seen what influence the church will have. (Sen. Obama is also winning with the 100-year-old-nuns bloc.) Another factor in Sen. Obama’s favor: a higher percentage of the Catholic vote will be Latino this year.

Last election, President Bush won Catholic voters 52%-46%.

5. Can Obama Finally Bowl a Strike With Skeptical White Catholics?
During the primaries, Obama did poorly with white Catholics, often working-class ethnics or their offspring. Remember his feeble attempt to curry favor through bowling? They tend to be culturally conservative and haven’t voted for a Democrat since 1996. On the other hand, they’re especially concerned about the economy this year, and Sen. Biden has been trying to bond with them as a fellow “cultural Catholics.”

Point of reference: In 2004, Bush won 56% of white Catholics, Kerry 43%

My thoughts:

4. While a majority of Catholics might favor abortion rights (what poll claims this, by the way?), I would argue that a majority of Catholics would identify more with McCain than Obama on the issue. The question is how much weight they will give to abortion at all. As for Latino voters - I would guess them to be more conservative on the issue of abortion than other Catholics.

5. I think the success of Senator Biden's Catholic outreach is hovering somewhere near zero. Catholics who do take their faith seriously couldn't care less for his "cultural Catholicism" and Catholics who don't take their faith seriously I don't foresee being seriously swayed by it, either.

Tuesday will tell.

National Catholic Reporter editors endorse Obama, and I lose it

Well, in effect.

Here's how the editors of NCR begin:

"Another presidential election cycle is nearly ended, and once again the Catholic bishops in the United States have sadly distinguished themselves for the narrowness and, in too many cases, barely concealed partisanship, of their political views."

Notice, for the NCR editors, bishops who defend the teaching of the Church must be partisan if that teaching conflicts with the liberal viewpoint of the NCR editors. The fact that these same bishops are perfectly willing to accept pro-life democratic candidates completely eludes them.

Fundamentally, the NCR editors parrot the "get over Roe" talking point which has been made popular by pro-Obama catholics. Moreover, the NCR editors sign onto this position even after it was explicitlty condemned by the competant authorities in the US Bishops Conference.

The NCR editors even criticize the bishops for being narrow minded, for "turning the abortion issue into a partisan rallying cry" for "damaging the church and the pro-life cause" and for "erod[ing] the legitimate authority of an already beleaguered episcopal conference."

And all this crosses a line. How dare they.

How dare they claim that it is "partisan" affiliation which has prompted 60+ bishops (at last count) to speak out about the radical centrality of respecting human life in this election?

How dare the NCR editors claim that it is some sort of affinity for the GOP party (why? what do the bishops have to gain, exactly?) which prompts the bishops to council against supporting a candidate who would overturn every restriction on abortion in the books, who radically supports the right of a mother to have her child dead even in cases of a live birth, and who would have catholics and other Americans pay for it?!

And finally, how dare the NCR editors claim that they say all of this because of their Catholic faith?

Essentially, they are claiming to be more Catholic than (at least) 1-in-4 American bishops.

And they have intentionally put themselves under the condemnation already leveled against those who have similarly employed this nonsensical, disingenuous "the way to reduce abortions is to increase funding, support and access to them" argument.

How dare they.

(Oh, and having this photo - of young people walking in the annual March for Life, petitioning the Supreme Court to repeal Roe - serve as the accompaniment to their editorial? You know what I'm going to say.)

Cardinal Egan asks readers to "just look" at picture of unborn child

In his column yesterday for the New York Catholic, Cardinal Egan tried something different:

The picture on this page is an untouched photograph of a being that has been within its mother for 20 weeks. Please do me the favor of looking at it carefully.

Have you any doubt that it is a human being?

If you do not have any such doubt, have you any doubt that it is an innocent human being?

If you have no doubt about this either, have you any doubt that the authorities in a civilized society are duty-bound to protect this innocent human being if anyone were to wish to kill it?

If your answer to this last query is negative, that is, if you have no doubt that the authorities in a civilized society would be duty-bound to protect this innocent human being if someone were to wish to kill it, I would suggest—even insist—that there is not a lot more to be said about the issue of abortion in our society. It is wrong, and it cannot—must not—be tolerated.

Farther in:

It is high time to stop pretending that we do not know what this nation of ours is allowing—and approving—with the killing each year of more than 1,600,000 innocent human beings within their mothers. We know full well that to kill what is clearly seen to be an innocent human being or what cannot be proved to be other than an innocent human being is as wrong as wrong gets.

Do me a favor. Look at the photograph again. Look and decide with honesty and decency what the Lord expects of you and me as the horror of "legalized" abortion continues to erode the honor of our nation. Look, and do not absolve yourself if you refuse to act.

... but, did he mention any of this to Obama last weekend?

I mean, I agree with everything Cardinal Egan says, I'd just like to know what we're to make of the above.

Calling down the IRS on teaching bishops

It's already happening:

A church-state watchdog group has asked the Internal Revenue Service to investigate whether the Roman Catholic bishop of Paterson, N.J., violated tax laws by denouncing Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama.

In a letter sent to the IRS on Wednesday (Oct. 22), Americans United for Separation of Church and State accused Paterson Bishop Arthur Serratelli of illegal partisanship for lambasting Obama's support of abortion rights. (Religion News Service)

Read Bishop Serratelli's column here.

A final reflection for today

I've thrown alot of material up on the blog today - 8 posts on the election alone. Let's get concise.

I think what SDG said reflects accurately the opinion many observant, thoughtful Catholics are forming:

1. John McCain does not deserve your vote.
2. If Obama loses — to anyone — it will be a victory for life.

Even for those who admit the truth of 1, it's almost impossible to get around the urgency of 2.

And I think 3 logically follows.

Claim: 1-in-4 Bishops Promote "single issue voting"

Writing for the UK Tablet, Rocco does his homework, crunches the numbers, and comes up with this:

A quarter of America's bishops have said that the most important issue for voters in the forthcoming presidential election is abortion - comments that may help boost the fortunes of Republican candidate John McCain.

Some 50 out of the nation's 197 active bishops have published articles or given interviews during the run-up up to the election urging abortion as the key issue on which voters should decide which way to vote.

Of course, "single issue voting" is a caricature of what these bishops are teaching. They are actually defending the centrality of certain issues against those who would subjectively marginalize them. And so, in a very real way, the bishops are promoting "all issue voting", at least when compared to the alternative. We must always guard against letting the other side claim this truth as their own.

But let's get back to the really amazing statistic: over 1-in-4 active bishops have said this!

Rocco, whose comprehensiveness is to be trusted, can in fact only find two bishops who apparently argue the alternative "there's alot of issues out there" approach. So by my count, the bishops split like this:

• Abortion is the key issue: 50+
• Abortion is one issue among many: 2
• No comment (yet): 145

So what is the correct conclusion? Well, I would say it can no longer be claimed that the number of bishops who are concerned about the dismissal of abortion (and other fundamental life issues) constitute a slim minority - in fact, they are now a significant voice in the American hierarchy.

Some people, however, are obviously still living in serious denial. Robert Kaiser writing for the National Catholic Reporter today is a sterling example of the inability to admit the tide has turned. He begins:

"I really resent the few U.S. bishops who are now engaged in a campaign to swing the election for John McCain -- as they did for George W. Bush in 2004."

And let me just stop him right there, because by Rocco's count (and with the confirmation of the reporting I have done over the past months), Kaiser actually "resents" about 1-in-4 American bishops, if he resents those bishops who teach publicly that abortion is the key issue for Catholics when voting.

So, who should feel lonely now?

On Keeping/Kicking Kmiec Out

One bishop (Most Rev. Lawrence E. Brandt, JCD, PhD of Greensburg, PA) is trying:

Yesterday afternoon I received word that Seton Hill University had extended an invitation to Mr. Douglas Kmiec to speak on its campus regarding faith and politics. I have attempted in vain to reach the President of Seton Hill, Dr. JoAnne Boyle in this regard, but to no avail.

As the teacher of authentic Catholic doctrine in the Diocese of Greensburg, I feel compelled to state in view of this situation that Mr. Kmiec distorts Catholic teaching by making it synonymous with his own personal views. There is no “other” Catholic position except the one which appears in authentic Church documents. His misrepresentations of Catholic doctrine do a grave disservice to the Catholic community and far beyond.

I seriously question the good judgment of the University administration in allowing him a platform on campus.

... Is it any wonder then that not only the demonstrators at the event, but many others as well, consider his presentation an offensive trivialization of the institution's declared Catholic identity!

In a related vein, I wonder how this will go?

Decide in Faith: A Presidential Forum

Now you will have the chance to ask some questions! All questions will be based on Catholic Social Teaching! Questions submitted on this web site will be reviewed nd selected for the forum by a panel of Catholic college students and young adults!

Featuring Catholic Surrogates from the Presidential Campaigns // Senator Obama: Professor Douglas Kmeic, Author, Former Advisor to President Reagan // Senator McCain: Brian Palmer (R-Romeo) // Panel: College Students and Young Adults // Moderated by Fr. David Buersmeyer, Pastor of SS John and Paul in Washington, MI

An AmP Shout Out to the person who prints out one of the many arguments I've made against Kmiec's position and asks it during the debate. Audio/video would be a plus, too.

update: