[Leftist] Groups try to exploit scandal [in the Church]

USA Today via Yahoo ^ | 4-23-2002 | William Donohue

[Notwithstanding]

Groups try to exploit scandal
Tue Apr 23, 6:24 AM ET

For the past few decades, so-called progressive Catholics have been itching for large-scale reform in the Catholic Church. What they object to most of all is the church's teachings on sexuality. Representative of the fringe, they are now seizing the moment to install their agenda. The good news is they are not likely to prevail.

•	After brush with death, Sharon Stone says it's 'really nice to be alive'
•	All-USA students come from all over the world, all walks of life
•	Do you know how to respond to a tough interview question?
•	Dr. Funk ready for team groove

In 1996, a coalition of dissident Catholics called We Are Church made headlines seeking widespread reforms in the Catholic Church. It publicly stated that it would succeed in getting 1 million Catholic signatures demanding that the church change its teachings on contraception, abortion, homosexuality, female priests, etc. They were then to present their petition to Rome.

Eighteen months after this crusade began, the results were in: 37,000 signatures were garnered, one-third of which were by non-Catholics. Their failure was not one of adequate resources, as evidenced in the full-page ads they ran in Catholic newspapers. Indeed, they even bribed young kids, paying them a buck for every signature they got.

The monumental failure of We Are Church to persuade fellow Catholics to join with the dissidents is not hard to explain. Opinion polls may show that most Catholics favor married priests and female priests, but what isn't reported is that these sentiments are preferences, not demands. Outside of the radical fringe, very few Catholics are exercised over these issues. Which explains the failure of We Are Church.

But it is not alone in seeking to capitalize on the current situation. Some non-Catholics have advanced their own agenda as well. Make no mistake about it, the Catholic-bashers are loving this moment. Some newspaper cartoons have been incredibly vicious, painting all priests as molesters. Just as it is one thing to lambaste Ariel Sharon (news - web sites) or Yasser Arafat (news - web sites) or Bishop X, it is wrong to slam all Jews, all Palestinians and all bishops (or priests).

This is not a time for politics or prejudice, though sadly it has become one. The hard-news reporting by the media has been quite fair, and it is hardly anti-Catholic to report on the scandal. But it is wrong when those with an agenda seek to exploit this issue for partisan purposes.

William A. Donohue is president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, based in New York. Fringe Catholics, non-Catholics see opportunity to push their agendas.

[Vladiator]

It's amazing that William Donohue is accusing others of trying to cash in on a scandal.

He and his group the Catholic League are the money changers to end all money changers, and he makes his living off of publicizing, and then being outraged by, various perceived slights.

Defender of the faith, my patootie.

[meandog]

Opinion polls may show that most Catholics favor married priests and female priests, but what isn't reported is that these sentiments are preferences, not demands.

If this were to happen then all RCs would instantly become Episcopalians...which is not altogether bad!

[Hibernius Druid]

Representative of the fringe, they are now seizing the moment to install their agenda.

Much more than a "fringe." In his many recent TV appearances, Mr. Donohue has come across as a nice but naive guy who misreads the subtext of the current sex-abuse scandal.

Yes, it's about gay priests (not pedophile priests), but beyond that it's about American liberals who, under cover of Vatican Council II, have hijacked the American Catholic Church for thirty years or more.

Postmodernists to a person, they have deconstructed the Church's pastoral theology and desacralized its liturgy. Like all postmodernists, they crave power while despising authority -- that's why Pope John-Paul II can't go to his eternal reward soon enough for them. After him, their deluge.

[ikanakattara]

I would hardly expect William Donohue to point this out, but most Catholics do NOT believe the clearly stated teachings of their own church, especially in the areas of sexual morality (birth control, remarriage after divorce, etc.) Whose fault it is isn't my concern. For whatever reasons, they are perfectly content to remain contributing, Mass-going Catholics. I point this out not to criticize them, but to offer that if one fails to understand this point, one will not understand why the sex abuse scandals have been unfolding the way they have.

[Clemenza]

Mass-Going Catholics are less likely to be divorced than Cafeteria Catholics. Divorce as it exists in the secular world is merely respectable polygamy.

[Alberta's Child]

Donohue is not naive. In his current position he is constrained in what he can say about the Catholic Church because of the Catholic League's charter -- they were specifically created to defend Catholics from outsiders (secular government).

[Hibernius Druid]

Please comment on my main criticism, then I'll see whether your evaluation of Mr. Donohue has cogency. For now I'll hold to my position that he is naive, incredibly naive, and beyond that, dangerously thin-skinned.

He's been running too long with the East Coast secular humanists who would control the American Catholic Church and can't hold his own against the likes of "Father" Richard McBrien and Peter Cardinal Jennings.

[Alberta's Child]

Yes, it's about gay priests (not pedophile priests), but beyond that it's about American liberals who, under cover of Vatican Council II, have hijacked the American Catholic Church for thirty years or more.

It seems that your comment is based on anything that Donohue has said, but on what he doesn't say (at least publicly). My comment was intended to explain why he cannot speak publicly on many of the matters that concern you. I have a close relative who knows Donohue personally, and you are the first person I've come across who has used the word "naive" to describe him.

P.S. This is not based on any personal knowledge I have, but I predict that Donohue will resign and the Catholic League will fold within several months. The fact that all those articles and editorial cartoons he used to complain about have been proven to be right on target will convince him that people inside the Church are far more dangerous to the Church than those on the outside.

[Arthur McGowan]

Postmodernists to a person, they have deconstructed the Church's pastoral theology and desacralized its liturgy.

Their power and influence--in this case, imposing Lesbonics through the liturgy--is shown by the fact that you have not used the traditional expression, "...to a man."

[Hibernius Druid]

Maybe so, but then I don't use name-calling neologisms such as your "Lesbonics." Anyhow, JP-II is a "personalist," if you want to check out his philosophical school, so I feel quite comfortable in using variants of the beautiful word "person."

[Hibernius Druid]

Okay, perhaps he's not "naive," yet we need, metaphorically speaking, a super-adroit "street fighter" in high visibility public forums. I have no doubt Mr. Donohue is a very good person, so no offense meant.

[Catholicguy]

"I would hardly expect William Donohue to point this out, but most Catholics do NOT believe the clearly stated teachings of their own church, especially in the areas of sexual morality (birth control, remarriage after divorce, etc.)"

What follows may seem a "technical point," but it really isn't. During the Creed, we all stand and profess "...I believe in One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic..." That "Oneness" is "Unity" and that unity is a unity of Worship, Doctrine and Authority. (Vatican Two, in Lumen Gentium if I remember correctly,has the same explication of what is necessary to be Catholic)When one stands and professes the Creed while rejecting Doctrine, he is professing a lie. By rejecting Doctrine he is declaring he is not a Catholic.

It is easy to see that any "Catholic" who rejects Doctrine really is not a Catholic. He may profess publicly he is; but he is lying. He may answer polls intending to survey Catholics but his answers are invalid because he is not Catholic.

I don' think I have EVER seen a poll that surveys Catholics qua Catholics. When one hears a "Catholic" opposing Doctrine, remind yourself you are listening to a non- Catholic.

[Alberta's Child]

What we need is John Hughes, who was Archbishop of New York in the middle of the 19th Century. They didn't call him "Dagger John" for nothing.

P.S. No offense taken -- I was confused because you were painting a picture of Donohue that I had never seen before!

[Catholicguy]

I forgot to add that anyone at Mass who really does reject Doctrine should not profess the Creed anymore than one ought to go to a court room and bear false witness under oath.

It really is the same thing.....

[Hibernius Druid]

Yes, our age needs its "Dagger John." By the way, your Freepers homepage photos are awesome. You're blessed to have such aesthetic surroundings. Must make one feel close to God.

[Notwithstanding]

Your line bears repeating: "When one hears a "Catholic" opposing Doctrine, remind yourself you are listening to a non-Catholic."

[ikanakattara]

So if you have a poll, let's say, which shows that for instance 80% of US Catholics don't agree w/ Humanae Vitae, that means that it's safe to extrapolate that 80% of US Catholics aren't really Catholics? I'm really not trying to bait or bash anyone's religion here; I'm trying to make sense of this whole phenomenon with the sex scandals w/in Catholicism.

[meandog]

Mass-Going Catholics are less likely to be divorced than Cafeteria Catholics. Divorce as it exists in the secular world is merely respectable polygamy.

Excuse me, Clemenza, but even good smart Catholics can sometimes make mistakes. i.e.--GODFATHER: "...Tatallia's a pimp! All da while we figured it was Tatallia. And until this very day I never realized it was Bradzinni all the time!"

[Catholicguy]

"So if you have a poll, let's say, which shows that for instance 80% of US Catholics don't agree w/ Humanae Vitae, that means that it's safe to extrapolate that 80% of US Catholics aren't really Catholics? I'm really not trying to bait or bash anyone's religion here; I'm trying to make sense of this whole phenomenon with the sex scandals w/in Catholicism."

I take all polls with a mine of salt. There are just too many problems with "catholics" who respond to polls. Many who respond to polls are CINO, they go to Mass Easter and Christmas, funerals etc. The rest of the time they align their "beliefs" with the zeitgeist.

I don't think you are bashing at all. I am also trying to make sense of all this. Nevertheless, "Catholics" who reject "Humane Vitae" are Catholic only in the same sense that Democrats are Original Intent Consitutionalists.