Friday, June 12, 2009

Segments of the (Faithful) Church Working with Obama

I recently opened up two of the newspapers to which I subscribe: Today's Catholic and the National Catholic Register. Both of the newspapers ran stories that were re-printed from other news agencies, such as the Catholic News Service, and L'Osservatore Romano.

I have almost come to the point of desperation and am tempted toward hopelessness: not only is the American liberal media in a love affiar with President Obama, but so also is the Catholic press, and even the Vatican. Why? Obama has brilliant political strategists: he knows that a slim majority of Catholics voted for him, based on his presentation of social policies and an agenda that fits some aspects of Catholic social teachings. He knows that he needs to maintain and count on support from Catholics in order to further his agenda and goals. So begins the onslaught against faithful Catholics who believe in the Church's teachings on the dignity of each human life, and the hierarchy that accompanies the gravity of certain moral issues in relation to others:

-the Notre Dame affair: a speech through which Obama deludes many Catholics with his conciliatory rhetoric and appealing notion of "common ground" in a politically and socially divided nation. He is met with applause and warm congratulations by Fr. Jenkins, who has demonstrated compelte disregard for millions of Catholics in this nation.

-the appointment of Kathleen Sebelius as the HHS, as well as Alexia Kelley (from Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good) as an adviser in this department

-the appointment of Miguel Diaz as the new US Ambassdor to the Vatican. Dr. Diaz was on the Catholics for Obama steering committee, donated $1000 to the Obama campaign, and signed a petition in favor of Sebelius' nomination. He is a Rahnerian theologian who is interested in liberation theology (not that there is anything wrong per se either of the two).

--the nomination of the reverse-racist and liberal Justice Sotomayor for the Supreme Court position.

Why has Obama not selected pro-choice atheists or liberal Protestants for any of these positions? The Catholic Church would be better off.

Two things come to mind.

First, a spiritual persepctive: The devil is at work in our culture and our society, perhaps right now in a way more than ever before. One of the dangerous and effective ways in which the devil works is in small and unnoticeable ways, seemingly insignificant things that, after a period of time, contribute to the downfall of the good and the creation of scandal so as to sow discord. If one looks at the specific choices of these liberal Catholics, we can see the hand of the devil at work. Sure, on the surface, some of these persons will be "nice people," say they are "faithful to the Church," and even claim to be pro-life. But all one has to do is look at the president whom they support, and to whose campaign they have contributed time and money. So as a good friend of mine who is a priest said to me not too long ago, we would definitely see a great rise in the influence of evil working subtly if Obama were to be elected. To put it logically:

The devil hates the Catholic Church and will seek to destroy it.
The Catholics chosen for these posts support policies detrimental to the witness of the truths proclaimed by the Church.
These persons have been chosen by Obama.
Obama is cooperating with the work of the devil.

I am not saying Obama is possessed, but that there are certainly evil influences guiding his actions. I think this is his deliberate strategy, because he knows that the more he can break up the Catholic Church, the more divided will be the voice of opposition to his abysmal pro-life record.

Second, why in the world can't the Catholic media undestand this?

For weeks now, the editor of the L'Osservatore Romano has been defending his soft stance on the Obama administration's policies, even going so far as to say on Italian television that "I don't believe that Obama is a pro-abortion president."

Are you kidding me? Do you actually live in the United States? Why in the world is the editor of the quasi-officialVatican newspaper even involving himself in making political statements like this?

Then, I find out that Archbishop Pietro Sambi thinks Diaz is "an excellent choice because he knows very well the United States and because of his background in the Catholic Church." Furthermore, he thinks "Latin Americans should be very proud." Since when is evertyihg a racial issue? Why need the ambassador be selected on the grounds of his race?

The, I find out that Obama's speech in Cairo, in which he cites the Koran and offers a "we will now work with all of you together to find common ground" content, is praised by the local hierearchy of the Middle East. "It's the beginning of a new process, a new era. Obama really wants to change things, and the image of the United States will benefit from it," said the Chaldean bishop of Cairo.

Are you kidding? Why in the hell does a Catholic bishop care about the 'image of the United States?"

The only image I can think of that our country is projecting is that we do not value human life, but place a price on the hierarchy of its worth (utilitarianism): if you're alive, great. If you're alive and handicapped, that's too bad. If you're old, your life sucks. If you're not born, we can decide what to do with you. If you're not alive, we can bring you to life. Now let's export this mentality to Africa and South America through the UN and programs such as USAID.

As Michael Novak has said, we ask Rome for a sip of water, and they give us a bag of stones.

Maybe I am particularly sensitive to the issue, since I am a double domer and was heavily involved in ND Response to protest Obama. But the fact of the matter remains: the Catholic hierarchy, even within high levels in the Curia, are expressing themselves in a manner that undercuts and undermines the efforts of faithful, pro-life Catholics to expose the truth of the Obama agenda. I don't care if statements have to be made for political or for reasons of politeness: say something, but don't praise Obama, don't suggest your agreement with his policies, and for heaven's sakes, don't undercut the work of many good and faithful Catholics who already find themselves in a very difficult position to defend human life at all stages.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Amen!!

mamaela said...

Couldn't have beed said better!!

-J.C.S. said...

As my seminarian friend in Rome says:

The Church is getting torn apart, she is "dying" or in decline from the glorious institution she once was. But I prefer to look at it in a different light. Eventually, the Church, that bulwark of Truth, cannot tip-toe around the issues at hand. Soon enough there is going to have to be a stance, and instead of keeping everyone in the fold and happy, there is going to be much discontent and dissent. We are seeing a pruning of the branches on the vine. The weak separated from the strong. Although the man power might be cut down, when people leave after the Church has tried her best to keep them in the fold, anathema sit is all that we can say -- left to the mercy and judgment of God. The Church in the future will not be large, but she will be strong. And as trends come and go, we need this age of purification to make way for the next age of glory.
History repeats itself time and time again, and we have seen these problems before. The age we are embarking upon is going to be a time of struggle, martyrs (not necessarily by blood), and persecution. But we are called to be Saints! We are the ones that need to take that challenge and preach the Gospel, for although history repeats itself, and I have the hope that the Church will once again be revealed in all her glorious splendor, we cannot sit back as mere spectators. We must be the instruments of the Lord, follow His will and His grace to lead us where He needs us to build His Church. Like St Francis of Assisi, St Philip Neri, St Athanasius, St Boniface, and the countless other reformers of the Church, we must go forth under the banner of the Cross of Christ, Our only Hope!

Anonymous said...

Of course the image of the United States matters to the rest of the world, that's obvious.