Catholic Church asks Tom Daschle to stop calling himself a Catholic

Weekly Standard (via Matt Drudge) ^ | April 17, 2003 | SB00

[SB00]

TOM DASCHLE may no longer call himself a Catholic. The Senate minority leader and the highest ranking Democrat in Washington has been sent a letter by his home diocese of Sioux Falls, sources in South Dakota have told The Weekly Standard, directing him to remove from his congressional biography and campaign documents all references to his standing as a member of the Catholic Church.

This isn't exactly excommunication--which is unnecessary, in any case, since Daschle made himself ineligible for communion almost 20 years ago with his divorce and remarriage to a Washington lobbyist. The directive from Sioux Falls' Bishop Robert Carlson is rather something less than excommunication--and, at the same time, something more: a declaration that Tom Daschle's religious identification constitutes, in technical Catholic vocabulary, a grave public scandal. He was brought up as a Catholic, and he may still be in some sort of genuine mental and spiritual relation to the Church. Who besides his confessor could say? But Daschle's consistent political opposition to Catholic teachings on moral issues--abortion, in particular--has made him such a problem for ordinary churchgoers that the Church must deny him the use of the word "Catholic."

[ejo]

Kerry's selections for nominations with those qualifications you state may be an overwhelming task for him. You see, as we delve further into this quagmire, the list will be so long he will have to play "eenie meenie miny mo"hopefully creating a lawsuit for himself.

[Theodore R.]

Well consider nominally Catholic MA. If the bishop urged the rejection of EMK, the Catholic rank-and-file would arise in unision against the church. They would not arise in opposition to EMK. People in MA think that the state and the nation cannot live without EMK in the Senate.

[Terriergal]

Good one! :-)

[Terriergal]

You talking about JohnnyZ or who? I would think if you are pro catholic you wouldn't tend to support Torie's statements, which seem to amount to:

"You can be a Catholic and disagree with essential doctrines of Catholicism and anyone who says Daschle should straighten up is being unAmerican"

by picking a very commonly used nit which JohnnyZ may have used just to save time. Besides, maybe Daschle SHOULD consider a different religion altogether. Maybe he should consider Buddhism and become Tibetan monk -- and he can take a vow of silence to boot.

[Theodore R.]

What is there about EMK that makes a MA person "worship" such an individual as that? It could be that MA Catholic people gave into the face of EMK and see JFK! The Catholic Democrats are really in need of some new "heroes," it would seem to me.

[Desdemona]

Another matter is the "punishment" is selective. Thousands of Catholics who are public figures need to be instructed to cease calling themselves Catholic per this standard. That won't happen, because it would backfire.

Not among real Catholics it won't. Some of us get sick of these guys who use the church when it suits their purpose. Thanks to this bishop, maybe that won't be so easy in the future.

[Dengar01]

This is my favorite picture from the Support Our Troops Rally in Chicago last month. Note the sign for Daschle.

[GirlShortstop]

There is no difference between Middle Age Catholics and modern age Islam.   
    I'm going to bed....  Good night Barnacle; thanks for pinging me for a laugh at the absurd!

Reasoned discussion nineot?  I'm not going to hold my breath.  Have you noticed the glaring absence of any fact(s) presented in some vituperative, bizarre postings? Seems to me to be a waste of bandwith; leaving *nothing* to prove or disprove in response to a "dare".
Shame that some are clearly challenged in their posting acumen.  FReegards.

[Torie]

No, not at all. An order to change one's speech annoys me. If the Bishop said that Daschle's claim that he was Catholic was fraudulent in his opinion would be just fine with me (except for the selectivity bit; this should be a universal standard of reading "dissenters" out of the Church, not just done on an ad hoc basis). But he attempts to order someone who he thinks is not Catholic to stop saying he is Catholic. That has the leitmotif of hubris.

The next thing the Bishop might say is to order Torie (not Catholic or even religious at all) to stop posturing himself as a person with good moral values because he thinks protected life from a legal standpoint should begin a bit later than he does.

[Terriergal]

It is highly unusual, IMHO, for a church to ask that a member not identify him/herself with that church....highly unsual.

And isn't it a pity it's so very unusual, since it is certainly Biblical! The Church in general, all denominations, is filled with PC wimps who don't know what the Bible teaches in order to take a stand on it.

1 Cor 5:9-11 I have written you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people-- not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat.

2 Thessalonians 3:14 If anyone does not obey our instruction in this letter, take special note of him. Do not associate with him, in order that he may feel ashamed.

A Brother Who Sins Against You Matthew 18:15-17 "If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that 'every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.'If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector.

Romans 16:17 I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them.

[GirlShortstop]

The next thing the Bishop might say is to order Torie (not Catholic or even religious at all) to stop posturing himself...

Were you a Catholic, what the Bishop had "ordered" would matter.  Since you're not, what difference should it make to you?  I am not seeing your example as pertinent.

[Torie]

But the Bishop doesn't think Daschle is Catholic either, so Daschle and I in that sense are in the same box. The Bishop thinks neither of us is Catholic, and both are "immoral." And he has not standing to "order" us to do anything. He has standing to give his opinion. That's it.

[Terriergal]

But he attempts to order someone who he thinks is not Catholic to stop saying he is Catholic

Doesn't bother me a bit. He's not having the guy arrested. Church leaders are just as free under the first amendment to informally or formally request someone shut up and quit soiling their organization's reputation by purporting to be a member in good standing, as Daschle is to keep verbally crapping on it.

Nothing unamerican about it in the least. We sit around FR telling the democrats to do themselves and us a favor and stop spouting idiocy and making our country look bad, and it's perfectly american to do it.

[Torie]

Have you "ordered" folks with whom you disagree to shut up? Sorry, I fear I am beating this drum until it has no sound. I think I have made my point on this.

[Terriergal]

I would think then that by your reasoning, the Church's excommunication of say, Martin Luther would be objectionable too? Granted, that didn't take place in America or any place run like America, however the Church's theoritical Ultimate governing Authority (meaning God) has not changed since those days. But suppose someone like Martin Luther started challenging the Church nowadays in America? Would the Church be justified in excommunication? Being raised Lutheran myself, and being protestant still, I think the Catholic church has every right to excommunicate who it feels violates its tenets.

[Charles H. (The_r0nin)]

Ahhhh. I misunderstood. However, there is more to the Faith than simply the Nicene Creed. But it's not worth splitting hairs over. The Catholic faith has evolved over a long period of time, be it with respect to investiture, indulgences, ritual, etc. A medieval Catholic wouldn't be able to preside over a modern Mass, and would probably be shocked by the teachings out of Rome today (not that that is a bad thing).

Heck, a Protestant could claim to be following the "creed" established in the New Testament (as many more fundamentalist sects do), which has the longest pedigree of any Church document. Surely you wouldn't argue that the Church hasn't changed since 383, would you?

[Terriergal]

I might say it, yeah. But the difference is if I have the power of law behind my words. I do not. The Church, any church, any organization built around a set of ideas, has the authority to kick someone out of their association if they feel he/she is violating those tenets. I wish political parties would boot people out who continually violate their party platform. Like Olympia Snowe and her RINO ilk. Of what use is a political party or church or any group with common ideas if you cannot weed out those with conflicting ideas?

Sorry, I fear I am beating this drum until it has no sound. I think I have made my point on this.

Yes you have. It's just not a good one and IMO nothing you say can alter that.

[Charles H. (The_r0nin)]

See my reply to SoothingDave. I misunderstood his exact wording (skimming when I should be reading... missed the capital "C"), but that doesn't change the fact that the practice and teaching of the Faith has altered significantly since its founding...

[Torie]

I would have no problem in the Catholic Church excummincating Daschle, as long as several thousand or million other Catholics who publically advocated policies The Church thought beyond the pale were excommunicated as well. In fact, while I think such a position imprudent froma a practical standpoint, from a consistent moral standpoint it makes perfect sense, and I would post nothing to decry it. Indeed, it would be none of my business. Just why doesn't the Bishop move to excommunicate Daschle by the way? Perhaps that is beyond his pay grade, which I would understand, but then that puts the ball in a higher court.

[edwin hubble]

"But he attempts to order someone who he thinks is not Catholic to stop saying he is Catholic."

Actually you are mistaken here. Of course the church, or any private group, has the power to define the terms of membership and the conditions under which any individual is a member or not.

Daschle does not decide if he is a member. The private association decides his membership.

Suppose I claimed to be a member of a certain private association and showed open contempt for its beliefs.