The American Spectator

fred edwards| 11.20.08 @ 7:43AM

Negro (black is now unacceptable and african-american is balkanizing therefore negro should be accepable) negro wmen represent 6% of the female population in the USA.However they have 36% of all abortions.
It is my understanding from an anonymous source at NARL that Obama has pledged to get that number up to 50% before the end of his first term, and 65% if he has a second term.
This is change you can believe in.
Keep the change.
Fred Edwards

steve milam| 11.20.08 @ 8:14AM

With one simple change, the statement cited by Mr Orlet could support the Church's teaching with greater clarity: "Aggressively pro-abortion policies and legislation will permanantly ELIMINATE tens of millions of Americans..."

Rev Ed Moran| 11.20.08 @ 8:34AM

Orlet's point should be noted by Catholics, but it won't. Rarely are we as a group involved with critical reading. Given the severe dearth of episcopal leadership to teach, preach and sanctify their flocks in truths that have true import on the formation and preservation of the polity's common good, the 'wet noodle' is all we could expect from leaders who want to preserve their liberal credentials. Combine this with the hedonistic cultural buy-in (i.e. 'mainstreaming') by American Catholics, you have the proverbial 'House of Card' ready to collapse. It will take something akin to mass persecution for Catholics to awake to the pervasive effects of secular erosion among their ranks. Think: England before King Henry VII and the subsequent persecutions under Elizabeth. The accommodation with the culture is so widespread, the commensuration of good so relativized that few know how to push back against such an extensive culture of death that demeans and diminishes God's gift of life. Orlet has only traced the outline of the visible part of the 'iceberg' of Catholic accommodation. The deeper and hidden effects point to at least three lost generations of purported 'believers'...what we now refer to as 'Nominal' Catholics.

George Thompson| 11.20.08 @ 8:47AM

Mr. Orlet, implied in his “American Spectator” article “Crisis of Faith” posted online November 20, 2008 at 6:05 A.M. that Bishop Robert J. Hermann, of the Archdiocese of St. Louis, “had no trouble excommunicating eight parishioners and the parish priest (of St. Stanislaus Kostka) for violating canon law”. While Bishop Hermann more than likely supported his then boss, as I recall those events it was, in fact, former St. Louis Archbishop Raymond Burke who excommunicated those good people. You must keep in mind the key difference between those heretics and expert Catholic theologians such as Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, John Kerry and Missouri’s own Claire McCaskill: money. Abortion is a mere moral issue; whereas, the St. Stanislaus Kostka Board was withholding real cash from the Archdiocesan treasure chest which had been badly depleted by the lawsuits stemming from the rampant child abuse committed by a few of its priests. We must keep in mind the fate of Ananias and Sapphira described in Acts 5:2 was primarily a lesson about cash, though lying to Peter may have played a part. The message is clear. Misrepresenting Church teaching is just fine as long as the money keeps rolling in. How else was Teddy Kennedy, another authority on Christian morality, able to procure an annulment of his first marriage? Raymond Burke is an expert on Roman Catholic Canon Law. But then again Mr. Obama is an expert on the U.S. Constitution.

blackelkspeaks| 11.20.08 @ 9:12AM

There is no other explanation for this church-wide apostasy but that the American clerical class, who have been given the responsibility for educating the flock according to doctrine established in the Magisterium, have failed utterly in their duties to do so. Faithful Catholics have recognized and lamented this fact ever since Vatican II allowed the "smoke of Satan" to pervade the Church's institutions at every level. Pope Benedict himself has spoken and written about this catastrophe at length, but to no avail. As long as the clergy in this country are driven more by their desire to accommodate popular cultural trends of liberal lunacy (and to keep the money rolling in) than to commit their charges to age-old traditions of Christian truth, then the tragedy of having confused nominal Catholics continue to support abortion, euthanasia, human cloning, and atheistic Marxism will continue unabated. As Bishop Burke said recently in Rome, we have come to the point where the American Democrat Party has established itself as the vehicle for the Culure Of Death, such that no faithful Catholic can affiliate with that group in good conscience.

The greatest threat to the Church in this country is the sub-group of nominal Catholics who espouse and elevate the "social justice" position over all other considerations. For it is such as these that are trotted out every election day to vote for the Culture Of Death Democrats. In their wrong-headed view, some sort of "un-atheistic" Marxism is possible, and necessary to provide government funded welfare benefits to the indigent among us. In fact, they are nothing more than enablers for the total destruction of religious freedom in this country and, as such, are the enemies of Christ. "Man does not live by bread alone..."

John Doe| 11.20.08 @ 9:31AM

The Archdiocese of St. Louis is a model of Catholic orthodoxy and orthopraxy -- sound teaching, and sound practice emulated by its Bishops, both the Archbishop Emeritus, Raymond L. Burke, and now, Bishop Robert Hermann, not to mention its priests, and excellent seminarians.

Recently, Bishop Hermann declared the automatic excommunication for Schism incurred by Janice Merzweiler and Richard Lapinski, who both were elected to vacant seats on the Board of Directors of the same Corporation which the Vatican itself, in May of this year, declared was outside of the Catholic Church: the civil entity administering the former parish of St. Stanislaus Kostka, located in North St. Louis.

The fact that Archbishop Burke also, beyond the Stanislaus cases, declared the excommunication for Schism of the three "womenpriests" for their attempted ordinations (in a synagogue, btw), and punished a well-known canon lawyer, Fr. Thomas P. Doyle, O.P., for abuse of ecclesiastical office when he scammed the same schismatic St. Stanislaus Kostka Board members, demonstrates that the Archdiocese of St. Louis has not just declared excommunications when "money" was at stake.

Archbishop Burke, and now Bishop Hermann, have been, and are, staunch defenders of the Faith, in season, and out of season, which the other Bishops of the USCCB would do well to emulate.

Appleby| 11.20.08 @ 9:55AM

As a devout and practicing Catholic, I am firmly in favour of excommunicating all the cafeteria Catholics, starting with those who advocate abortion and pretend that they can compartmentalize their faith and their position as apparatchiks under our new Marxist Monarch, and proceeding from there to the divorced and remaried Catholics who blatantly receive the Eucharist in contravention of canon law (and the priests who refuse to enforce said laws), and so on. It is better that the church have eight Catholics whose intention is to practice the entire canon and obey its directives than 8,000 hippies who think they are getting away with something by declaring that the Pope is Not The Boss Of Them. (Should they really believe that, there are plenty of churches that they can attend, including Rev. Jeremiah *GD Amerikka* Wright's Church of What's Happening Now and I suggest the Bishops, Archbishops, Cardinals and Pope start kicking their sorry heinies to the kerb.

Sandra| 11.20.08 @ 11:02AM

The CHURCH has not waivered on it's teaching, it is society that has parted ways with moral teaching and judgment.

Of course this murder of innocents is embraced by the godless Left and those that "admire" the hedonistic lifestyle and are active members of the "ME first" generations. The very same people that want their big houses and small "rental fees" instead of saving and building up for a mortgage.

The same people that want to be taken care of by the "mommy state" and their sports and cheap junk food. (Bread and circuses?)

We better watch out, next will be the elderly, and the sick, those for whom medical care is "bankrupting" the system. Another endorsement for government, (i.e. socialist) medical care.

I may have grown up a "cafeteria catholic" only because I was not guided in my faith formation to be any different. I am learning to find my way back to the true faith.

Eugene Debbs| 11.20.08 @ 11:22AM

Re: "Cafeteria Catholics"

I find it odd that people who veer towards the "liberal" are considered "cafeteria Catholics" when "conservatives" have as difficult a time as anyone living up to the teachings of the Church.

True, on the issue of abortion and other life issues "conservatives" are more in line with Church teaching.

However, our last Pope was unambiguous about the Iraq War, and he many times urged the U.S. to abandon the death penalty, which is no longer necessary to ensure safety or societal order.

The Church also teaches that placing the highest priority on profit making is not consistent with Christian faith, something at odds with much conservative rhetoric and belief. The Church has also been very critical of anti-immigrant rhetoric, which usually has come from the "conservative" end of the political spectrum.

Alan Brooks| 11.20.08 @ 11:30AM

Great piece. But please don't forget it is businessmen who sell birth control, filth online and on TV, and so forth. And I wonder who manufactures and markets the equipment used in abortion clinics to perform abortions?
Neo- Catholics are liberal on immigration however businessmen import too many of our buddie-wuddies from sunny latin America for me to want to blame liberalism solely or to affix any culpability to neo-Catholics. Gee, it's a good thing businessmen aren't more permissive than they are; we'd really be in trouble then, wouldn't we?

Eugene Debbs| 11.20.08 @ 11:30AM

Re: "Cafeteria Catholics"

I wonder how many of you remember the political fight in the 1980s over funding for El Salvador's oppressive regime.

People in the Catholic church joined together to end that atrocity, perpetrated largely by a Republican administration and conservatives in Congress in the name of fighting communism.

The so-called "anti-communists" in El Salvador, you'll remember, assassinated Archbishop Romero and frequently attacked Church officials for merely ministering to the poor. (Ministering to the poor having been determined to be communist sympathizing.) The most famous and awful incident was when a government death squad raped and murdered five Catholic workers and nuns.

Were the Catholics who supported Reagan and thereby supported these policies "cafeteria Catholics" just because Reagan mouthed pro-life sentiments.

Name me the Republican politician that has sacrificed anything -- even so much as an afternoon -- on the life issue. When did Bush propose a Constitutional amendment banning abortion?

No, these people are using the Catholic vote and manipulating people based on their most sacred beliefs. Scrape them off, Catholics!

Alan Brooks| 11.20.08 @ 12:21PM

Eugene,
Bringing down Communism was worth it; in all wars there are innocent casualties-- collateral damage-- and America had to use the operatives it had available in Central America to oppose Communism.
The reason Bush can't get an amendment to ban abortion is America has no morality.
But Eugene, we might agree that abortion is just a symptom; the cause is our collective violence. Peace is only for small nations such as Vatican City. A large violent nation like America will never know any real peace, only maybe a dreary 'relative peace' that means we want to kill each other more than anything but we'll grit our teeth and be nice. But what does "nice" mean?
We're all talking past each other...

Eugene Debbs| 11.20.08 @ 1:26PM

Alan,

I might be more sympathetic with your post if it were more accurate and comprehending of history.

Our government's activities in El Salvador played no role in defeating communism (communism itself played the most important role in that defeat), and shrugging off the murder of civilians on the part of American financed death squads is not my idea of clear moral thinking.

A terrible conflict at the heart of contemporary conservative thought exists between the desire for making room for faith and morality to inform public policy and a notion like American "exceptioinalism," which implicitly excuses moral failings on the part of our government.

Patrick Whelan| 11.20.08 @ 1:48PM

Would Mr Orlet describe himself as pro-divorce? I don't see him fighting to make divorce illegal. How about pro-torture? I haven't seen him writing forcefully to reverse the Bush policy making torture by the CIA legal. My point is that when he imitates other insult slingers on the right by using the term "pro-abortion politicians" to describe Democrats who don't think criminalization will solve the abortion problem, it represents a weakness in his logic and a deficiency in his character.

Alan Brooks| 11.20.08 @ 2:00PM

Eugene,
If what you write above is correct, and it might be an exaggeration to write our government's "activities" (like paper doll cutting?) in El Salvador played "no role", then more is the tragedy. We have no morality and never will.
We have no civilization.
It's barbaric.
We're all yapping at cross purposes.

blackelkspeaks| 11.20.08 @ 2:05PM

Eugene Debbs (a very telling sobriquet - i.e. an avowed Socialist) wrote:

"True, on the issue of abortion and other life issues "conservatives" are more in line with Church teaching. "

"However, our last Pope was unambiguous about the Iraq War, and he many times urged the U.S. to abandon the death penalty, which is no longer necessary to ensure safety or societal order."

"The Church also teaches that placing the highest priority on profit making is not consistent with Christian faith, something at odds with much conservative rhetoric and belief. The Church has also been very critical of anti-immigrant rhetoric, which usually has come from the "conservative" end of the political spectrum. "

Here we see the asininity of a "social justice" pseudo-Catholic on full display.

Sure, Debbs says, pseudo-Catholics admit that the conservatives are better on adherence to Church doctrine concerning fundamental issues, such as being anti-abortion, anti-euthanasia, anti-human cloning, anti-homosexual perversity, etc.

But, as pseudo-Catholics, we choose to elevate the importance of transitory issues, like the modern, liberal fetish of posing as anti-war and anti-death penalty advocates (both issues having over 2000 years of Church teaching supporting the legitimacy of each, such as Just-War Doctrine and the Saints apologias for Justice and Self-Defense validating their necessity in certain cases). But we prefer to be modern and oh-so-enlightened poseurs!

And the never-ending canards about the evils of Wall Street are just plain infantile and ignorant, revealing a troubling lack of understanding about the principles of free will and liberty that are manifested in trade and commerce, including the necessity of free association and the rule of law. But then, all advocates of "social justice" don't consider liberty and freedom as good ends. Rather, these pseudo-Catholics much prefer forced compliance with a myriad of arbitrary restrictions established by their secular masters.

What really makes pseudo-Catholics, such as Debbs, so dangerous is their absolutely stupefying lunacy in aligning themselves with the liberal left, which is now, and always has been, at the root, concerned with destroying any influence of religion in every sphere of life to advance its credo of atheistic Marxism and total governmental control of every human being. To wit, to make Man a slave to the State! And all this, in the name of some "social justice" that blinds them to the horrific atrocities perpetrated against members of their own faith community during the 2oth century in numerous countries around the world, like Nicaragua (and Russia, and China, etc. etc.).

As St. Thomas More once said: "It is sad, indeed, to gain the whole world but lose your soul, ...but to lose you soul for Wales...).

Alan Brooks| 11.20.08 @ 2:44PM

"and where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? I give the devil his [?] for my own safety's sake..."
and later:
"our business lies in escaping".
Hiding and escaping. Sounds like the way to go!

Eugene Debbs| 11.20.08 @ 6:53PM

blackelkspeaks --

I'm glad to have finally encountered someone so holy and firm in his faith he has absolutely no trouble dismissing me as a "pseudo-Catholic" after reading a brief posting on an internet site and taking it out of context.

The mind reels to be in the presence of those untainted by sin, modernity, and thinking that has taken place since the early sixteenth century.

As you would have no way of knowing, I oppose abortion and euthenasia. I believe my positions are square enough with the Church -- although I'll say I'm Irish first and Catholic second, and God help me I'm never even close to holy.

Pope John Paul II applied just war theory to his judgment on the Iraq War. I know that makes me a communist sympathizer, but what can I say?

That same pontiff was deeply troubled by what he called a "culture of death," and he never once signalled he thought Republicans were somehow not a part of it. The death penalty -- which does have a complicated doctrine attached to it -- was examined in its present form and use and unambiguously descried by the pope.

Being troubled by a conumerist society is the burden of being thoughtful. Nothing in my understanding of the Church tells me that Milton Friedman delivered a moral vision of a perfectly just society, nor were so-called "free market" capitialist ideas delivered forth from the arses of angels.

We made them, and we made them for the benefit and convenience of some and at the expense of others. To think in the modern world is to think about that fact.

John| 11.20.08 @ 6:58PM

Before the trajectory of comments sails off into another universe, I'd like to make the quick point in support of Mr. Orlet that, if American
Catholics were educated in their faith rather than marinated in a peculiar hodgepodge of sentimental and new age episcopalianism, Barack Obama would not have been elected. The American Catholic bishops, most of them, have much to answer for when they give an final accounting of their abysmal stewardship over the past two generations. We need to pray for them.

Eugene Debbs| 11.20.08 @ 7:27PM

John --

I assure you educating Catholics about their faith does not begin with name-calling and foolish dogmatism. While you condescend to others, mooing about the need to pray for bishops, perhaps think about what you yourself might do to contribute to a faith community that is strengthened by civil and respectful discourse.

John| 11.20.08 @ 7:50PM

Dear Prof. Debbs:

Thank you for your condescending, civil, and respectful assurances. Although it's true that I'm a fool, you may have misfired when you referred to my dogmatism as foolish. The dogmas to which I subscribe have a rather long pedigree, and I didn't make them up. Nor do I think you would approve of the "faith community" to which I've contributed over the past 60 years as a student, teacher, and parent. To recapitulate, with or without a moo, the American Catholic bishops, most of them, have much to answer for, and I pray for them. Moo, if you prefer. Heck, I even pray for Professor Debbs.

Eugene Debbs| 11.20.08 @ 9:08PM

Not too long ago we were treated to an arrogant ignoramus from Alaska lecturing us about who "real" Americans are and where "real" America is.

In this thread we have a few people taking the opportunity to discuss Catholicism in America as an occasion to lecture us about who "real Catholics" are.

If you're satisfied with this sort of thing, by all means keep it up. You'll find you're left murmuring with a shrinking circle of people who share your views -- but no one else.

All else aside, I'm grateful if John or anyone else prays for me. God knows I need it.

John| 11.20.08 @ 9:42PM

My dear Debs:

I confess I was charmed half witless by your last sentence. The rest of your response was the usual wham-wham. First, an apology. I admit that I referred to you as "professor" with a certain condescension. For more than 40 years now, I've worked in academia--a strange environment in which everyone has the same first name, so that, whenever I read or hear anything that strikes me as obviously self-serving and asinine, I immediately attribute the remark to someone with that first name.
It was tiresome of me to do so, and I apologize.

Wit aside, however, why do you supp0se that I am "lecturing" you about "real Catholics"? I am myself a Roman Catholic Christian in full assent to the Church's teaching magisterium. Who are you? And why do you have trouble with my confession? And what makes you say my "circle" shrinking? Is the circulation of Commonweal or America skyrocketing while that of First Things and Catholic World Report and the National Catholic Register--to name a few--is "shrinking"? And even if it were so, would that make an ounce of difference to the point in question? Does it really matter, for example, that sure-enough orthodox Catholic institutions like Thomas Aquinas College and Steubenville are overwhelmed by applications while secularized formerly Catholic institutions like Santa Clara and USF have taken on the mantle and cliches of secularism without any noticeable change in admissions?

I mean, even if it were true that throwback like myself were shrinking in numbers, what relevance would that development have to the truth of things? Do you really believe that truth is determined by numbers? If so, then what you believe is not Catholic, that's all.

I can't speak for others, but neither my children nor my orthodox Catholic acquaintances nor I am "satisfied" with anything this side of the Jordan. I would hope that you might someday become less satisfied with your stale cliches, and stop pretending that you have a magic window through which you can discern the hearts of Catholics who still hold to the faith of their fathers.

Nice last sentence, though. Once a Catholic, always a . . . well, you know the rest.

Eugene Debbs| 11.20.08 @ 10:10PM

John,

I'm delighted to hear that some more conservative universities are flourishing.

I do not believe I have a magic window through which to view your heart or anyone else's.

My closest friends (Catholic friends) and I disagree on politics and how we allow our faith to shape our views about politics and public policy. It doesn't change the fact that we are a part of the same faith. Most of them are more "conservative" than I am, although some are more "liberal."

The shrinking circle I referred to was not so much those who attend mass, but those who are willing to have a conversation with you about how their faith informs their politics. As Catholics, there are things we are told are so and we accept on faith.

I do not accept that my vote is one of them. I also am proud to belong to the ONE party that's put a Catholic on its ticket for the presidency. I think it's fine to belong to the party that does NOT court anti-Catholic bigots for spiritual advice (e.g. Rev. Hagee).

The life issues break my heart. I don't know what else to say. But I'll never vote Republican, God help me. Never. I couldn't bring myself to do it, and yes, definitely, how Republicans treated Central America in the 70s and 80s plays a big part in that. But also I don't like their Moloch-worshiping insolent reverence for the Invisible Hand of the market. It's a dark idolatry.

I never find it useful to talk about "cafeteria" Catholics are any of that sort of thing.

Eugene Debbs| 11.20.08 @ 10:18PM

I suppose I was provoked into my postings above by all this talk of excommunication and so on. I think that it's a bad way to follow, but what do I know?

Erasmus always helps:

Breve tempus est, and arduum est negotium agere vere Christianum.

John| 11.20.08 @ 10:56PM

Yo Debbs. I can't say I follow your remarks about not possibly being Catholic and Republican. I grew up in a secular household and became Catholic by choice, later. I would suspect that you're a "cradle Catholic." My wife also is a cradle Catholic, and she often tells me that there are certain things about American Catholic habits that I couldn't possibly understand. Yet she is a registered Democrat and has voted Republican for roughly 30 years now. I don't know, except abstractly, what any of that is about. I just do what I'm told because I'm a faithful husband as well as an orthodox Catholic. It all seems to mesh rather nicely.

As to your central American obsession, you might want to read, say, George Weigel's stunning biography of Wojtyla to learn of another take on what happened in Central America in the eighties.

If you're interested. I'm getting older now, and all I really want to do is make it to retirement, help homeschool my grandchildren (the number of my children and grandchildren would probably shock you, if you're a chic liberal), and cross the Jordan to find out, finally, what the hell this has all been about. If we meet on the other side some day, we can discuss it. The God we believe in likes to delegate, so I suspect Purgatory is some kind of low-level involvement in salvation history, from the other side. Have a good Thanksgiving.

Eugene Debbs| 11.21.08 @ 12:42AM

You too, John.

Jason| 11.21.08 @ 1:58AM

Churches and the GOP are suffering from the same problem: the effects of weak commitment to their core values.
http://rightklik.blogspot.com/

Michael L. Hauschild| 11.21.08 @ 6:48AM

I wouldn't post on this topic to save my soul!

Richard| 11.21.08 @ 12:57PM

Very good comments from most. I'm what most people would call a "traditional" Catholic, while I simply say that I'm just Catholic. I view those of the cafeteria variety as CINO - catholic in name only (small "c" intentional). These are the Lost Catholics very analogous to the lost tribes of Israel.

In our past, when our Church was confronted with rampant heresy it took a measured response, the Inquisition. Too bad most view the Inquisition through the lens of history as told by protestants in Schism rather than the Catholic view see: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08026a.htm

What we need to do is cleanse our Church of the Evil that is within as other have stated. The only way to do this is Inquisition accountable only to the Pope. IMHO, it should start with a review of our bishops and priests. Their words and deeds speak volumes on their anathema, heresy and sacrilege.

Unfortunately, this will not likely happen due to many factors especially the shortage of well formed religious and the major upheaval it will cause. With less than 20 bishops in the USCCB who enforce Canon 915, there would be many vacancies and even fewer priests. This would clearly decimate the ranks of orders like the Jesuits who have strayed the furthest from their founder's tenets.

I'd rather a smaller, authentic Church to the mess of what we have today. I pray our Holy Father will use his powers as Vicar of Christ to cleanse the Evil through Inquisition before the situation gets worse.

Gazinya| 11.23.08 @ 10:10AM

Query. Does your faith in Christ shape your religion or does your religion shape your faith in Christ?

Greg| 11.24.08 @ 2:43PM

I have a nobel idea. How about the church follow the teachings and example set by Christ and the word of God. Gasp!!! Oh no we can't do that, someone might get their feelings hurt!!! This is absolutely rediculous, how is this even up for discussion within the church. This is why I have left the catholic church for a non-denominational bible based church. Such this is a sign of the end times.

Greg| 11.24.08 @ 2:46PM

This is a perfect example of the saying "not everyone who goes to church is going to heaven."
Jesus is the answer and only way people. Get with the program!!!!

Riz| 1.26.09 @ 1:36AM

As a reformed conservative, I can tell you with little regret that the economic policies practiced during the Bush years led to MORE abortions than during the Clinton years.