More On "Faithful Citizenship"

Judie Brown of American Life League has pulled no punches on what she sees as the weaknesses in the USCCB's new document "Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship" that was approved last week. Needless to say, she, & many others of us, were disappointed that the Bishops didn't take a uniform stand on Canon Law 915. She was interviewed by LifeSite on Wednesday 14 November 2007. Here is that interview:

LifeSiteNews: Do you have a response to the document issued today?

Judie Brown: I sure do. My response is both positive and negative. The positive is that they finally seem to have brought themselves to the point of being able to admit that abortion is a fundamental question and it should not be tied into other, quote, unquote "issues". I suppose that’s encouraging except they failed to say anything about pro-abortion politicians who are Catholic and the obligation that they as bishops have to deny Holy Communion and I am terribly distraught about that and generally it’s sort of a milk toast kind of a document.

LifeSiteNews: They say they addressed the communion issue in previous documents.

Judie: They have never addressed the communion question. See, they relegate everything to a quote, unquote “issue” and they do not want to discuss it and the fact of the matter is they have a moral obligation to enforce Canon 915. There should be unanimous agreement on that and anything less than that is a scandal.

LifeSiteNews: Have you read the document yet?

Judie Brown: I have only seen quotes from it. I have not had a chance to read the whole thing.

LifeSiteNews: Is it possible that because of the length of the document (40 pages), its discussion of many different issues and its emphasis on conscience, abortion will get lost instead of being the highest priority?

Judie Brown: Well, you know, even more basic than that, they can issue documents until they are blue in the face and it’s not going to make a difference to Catholics because Catholics are not being taught, they are not being catechized on the fundamental teachings of the Church. I think the average Catholic would probably not even know that document existed or if he did he would pay absolutely no attention to it because it is supported by no moral authority (Bishops' conferences do not have any canonical Church teaching authority). They don’t teach the truth from the pulpit. Such documents are going to have no significance whatsoever because they’re not supported with any daily, weekly effort on the part of the bishops as a united body to teach and to demand that their priests teach the fundamental teachings of the Church.

LifeSiteNews: What else, other than the communion issue, would you have liked to see in the document?

Judie Brown: You know what, I would prefer that they not issue a document and they get about the business of teaching the truth to Catholics.

LifeSiteNews: So, its more about the individual bishops doing their job. Is that what you would say?

Judie Brown: That’s exactly what I am saying. When you have only 13 out of 195 who have the courage to defend Christ in the Eucharist (enforce Canon 915) you have a big problem.

Later, after reading the document, she had more to say about it in her ALL blog. (POLITICS DOES NOT A BISHOP MAKE) She makes some very good points about the weaknesses in the document. & I can't say that I blame her for her disappointment.

I am so disheartened by the new USCCB document, "Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship."

The bishops tell the reader that, "The direct and intentional destruction of innocent human life from the moment of conception until natural death is always wrong and is not just one issue among many." This is in paragraph 28 and is a fabulous statement. But, in #42 they say, "As Catholics we are not single-issue voters. A candidate's position on a single issue is not sufficient to guarantee a voter's support. Yet a candidate's position on a single issue that involves an intrinsic evil, such as support for legal abortion or the promotion of racism, may legitimately lead a voter to disqualify a candidate from receiving support."

What??? Abortion and racism? Could it be that a hateful attitude and an act of direct murder are equally evil in Church teaching? Where is that written?

And why, pray tell, would the bishops tell us that support for such an evil "may legitimately lead a voter..."? Does that mean that a voter could cast a vote for someone who supports such an evil?

What in the world does section 42 really mean? And, believe me, it gets worse.

In #64 the bishops say, "Abortion, the deliberate killing of a human being before birth, is never morally acceptable and must always be opposed," but in #32 they say that "incremental improvements in the law" can be acceptable. One has to wonder if that includes exceptions such as rape, incest and life of the mother which the bishops have supported for years.

The bishops further state in #33 that, "prudential judgment is also needed in applying moral principles to specific policy choices in areas such as the war in Iraq, housing, health care, immigration and others." Are we to conclude that like abortion, which is apparently a political issue, these other questions are of equal moral value when examining how a Catholic should vote?

Well, here is your answer. In #34, the bishops advise: "A Catholic cannot vote for a candidate who takes a position in favor of an intrinsic evil, such as abortion or racism, if the voter's intent is to support that position." But they continue in the same paragraph to instruct that, "At the same time, a voter should not use a candidate's opposition to an intrinsic evil to justify indifference or inattentiveness to other important moral issues involving human life and dignity."

If you are now totally confused about what the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops is telling the faithful about the murder of innocent preborn babies and the supremacy of this question versus all others, join the club!

I am disgusted with this statement. By the way, tell me why abortion is mentioned by name 15 times, but war is mentioned 21 times and poverty is mentioned 17 times--and the word "murder" which defines abortion is never mentioned.

As my good friend Phil Lawler wrote, when analyzing the USCCB statement:

Quoting that statement, and citing the list of causes that runs on (and on and on and on) in the USCCB statement, a Catholic voter could attempt to justify support for a candidate who favors unrestricted legal abortion and same-sex marriage, explaining that his favored candidate takes the right stand on such "morally grave" issues as gun control, the Earned Income Tax Credit, food stamps, global warming, Medicare and Medicaid, teachers' salaries, or immigration."

May God help us. Pray for our bishops.

Fr. Frank Pavone of Priests for Life has also issued a statement. (The US Bishops’ Document Faithful Citizenship) His statement looks at those parts of the document that can be used in a positive way to get the Pro-Life message out & get Pro-Life candidates elected.

In the year prior to each Presidential election year, the US Bishops issue a document to review with Catholics their responsibility to be citizens active in the political process. In November of 2007 the bishops approved “Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship: A Call to Political Responsibility.”

Priests for Life welcomes the bishops’ statement. The Faithful Citizenship statements have always outlined the many important issues that relate to the ‘common good.’ Many of the previous statements have been criticized for failing to adequately distinguish the differences between the moral gravity of the various issues, and the distinction between policy and principle. The most recent statement, however, does more to highlight those distinctions.

We at Priests for Life echo the bishops’ call for a consistent ethic of life, properly understood, which begins with the proclamation that life is sacred and that the right to life can never be denied to a person, whether born or unborn. This ethic continues to call for the efforts of public officials and citizens alike to preserve and enhance the other fundamental rights of every person, such as religious liberty, and to protect the many goods that are to accompany life itself: education, health care, security, and many more.

“The bishops’ statement calls us to avoid two extremes in considering these issues. One is to ignore the distinctions among the issues; the other is to ignore some of the issues when making the distinctions.

The bishops furthermore point out that as we participate in political parties, we are also called to change those parties wherever and whenever their positions fail to correspond to the demands of justice and the common good. In particular, we at Priests for Life call upon the Democratic Party to abandon its pro-abortion stance, recognizing that such a stance imperils and dilutes any progress that can be made on other issues.

We also want to emphasize in a particular way the call that the bishops make for Catholics to be involved in running for office and being active in political parties. This is completely consistent with a life of faith and worship. In fact, public service in political life is a vocation.

The statement, furthermore, explains that Catholics who vote for candidates because they want to keep abortion legal, or who ignore the pro-abortion stance of a candidate and support him or her just because of party loyalty, are acting immorally.

The document does leave room for voting for a candidate who favors legal abortion if, for instance, the opposing candidate is even more pro-abortion than the one for whom the voter is voting.

The statement encourages Catholics to use voter education materials produced by their dioceses, and so do we. Unfortunately, many dioceses do not produce any voter guides or election-related materials. Priests for Life urges such dioceses to do so. The faithful, of course, are always free to produce and use other election-related material. This is consistent with the statement’s call to be active in the political process and in political parties themselves.

Our commitment at Priests for Life is to make this document widely known, and to distribute it far and wide at our own expense. Moreover, we call upon priests to preach on its contents, on candidates to study its lessons, and on voters to heed its guidance.

Human Life International hasn't issued a statement yet.

(Photo: LifeSite)