Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How the Catholic Church Became Cool Overnight
Bad Catholic ^ | February 10, 2012 | Marc

Posted on 02/11/2012 11:55:23 PM PST by Brian Kopp DPM

How the Catholic Church Became Cool Overnight

Posted on by Marc

Or, to be precise, how all the balling was duly recognized.

Having tested the waters of agnosticism, the general culture, and a whole host of personal heresies, sins and stupidities, I have come to Walker Percy’s conclusion:

Q: What kind of Catholic are you?

A. Bad.

Q: Are you a dogmatic Catholic or an open-minded Catholic?

A: I don’t know what that means . . . . Do you mean do I believe the dogma that the Catholic Church proposes for belief?

Q: Yes.

A: Yes.

Q: How is such a belief possible in this day and age?

A: What else is there?

Q: What do you mean, what else is there? There is humanism, atheism, agnosticism, Marxism, behaviorism, materialism, Buddhism, Muhammadanism, Sufism, astrology, occultism, theosophy.

A: That’s what I mean.

Q: I don’t understand. Would you exclude, for example, scientific humanism as a rational and honorable alternative?

A: Yes.

Q: Why?

A: It’s not good enough.

Q: Why not?

A: This life is too much trouble, far too strange, to arrive at the end of it and then to be asked what you make of it and have to answer “Scientific humanism.” That won’t do. A poor show. Life is a mystery, love is a delight. Therefore I take it as axiomatic that one should settle for nothing less than the infinite mystery and the infinite delight, i.e., God. In fact I demand it. I refuse to settle for anything less.

So get at me.

As far as I’m concerned — though I’m certainly open to scientific humanism making a big, total-fulfillment-of-the-human-person comeback — Catholicism is the addict’s fix, the starving child’s Chipotle burrito, and the UVA student’s pastel shorts and button-downs, etcetera, etcetera, ad infinitum et in saecula saeculorum, amen. What I didn’t realize – how could I? — is that the world would catch up to my particularly brilliant brilliance.

That’s right folks. I woke up this morning and the Church was the shizz. This is first and foremost because we have been rudely placed in the position of rebellion, and of the advocation of civil disobedience. To those who understand the teachings of the Church, this rebellion is nothing new, it has just been suddenly and fantastically stuck in the public eye. (Thank you, Department of Health and Human Services.) The Church already rebels against the twin monsters Socialism and Capitalism in her teachings, and strives instead after the principles of subsidiarity, in which the human person is neither an economic tool nor a cog in the machine. The Church already calls us to rebel against the culture of death, against abortion — of course — but with equal fervor against euthanasia, unjust war, the unjust use of the death penalty, suicide, terrorism, and any attacks on life. But now everyone gets to know that these guys:

Are all about this:

But nicely, like this:

And, with rapidity, this everyone has been expressing their support. Let’s take NPR, one of the more leftist media outlets. They had the daring to post a piece from the secular The Weekly Standard, which said, amongst other gems:

It’s unclear whether Obama anticipated the blowback which resulted from this announcement, or perhaps even welcomed the fight. The liberal Catholic establishment nearly exploded. Sister Keehan was so horrified she threw her lot in with the more conservative Dolan in full-throated opposition to Obama. Cardinal Roger Mahony, the spectacularly liberal archbishop emeritus of Los Angeles, wrote, “I cannot imagine a more direct and frontal attack on freedom of conscience… This decision must be fought against with all the energies the Catholic community can muster.” Michael Sean Winters, the National Catholic Reporter‘s leftist lion, penned a 1,800-word cri de coeur titled “J’accuse!” in which he declared that, as God was his witness, he would never again vote for Obama. The editors of the Jesuit magazine America denounced a “wrong decision,” while the Washington Post columnist E. J. Dionne called the policy “unconscionable.” When you’ve lost even E.J. and the Jesuits, you’ve lost the church.

Indeed, and such on NPR. This particularly great write-up came with The Atlantic, Laura Ingraham, Hot Air — noting with Rasmussen that the majority of Americans are against the attack on religious liberty — and a whole host of others. But here’s the thing about the Church. Once you begin the radical task of defending Her right to practice what She preaches, you can’t help but notice how excellent that preaching is. Thus the issue of why — precisely — the Church is against the use of artificial contraception is similarly irritating the public eye, and as it turns, ’tis a beautiful irritant. The Business Insider, an entirely secular journal, found it alarming enough to publish Time To Admit It: The Church Has Always Been Right On Birth Control. From the article:

The Church teaches that love, marriage, sex, and procreation are all things that belong together. That’s it. But it’s pretty important. And though the Church has been teaching this for 2,000 years, it’s probably never been as salient as today.

Today’s injunctions against birth control were re-affirmed in a 1968 document by Pope Paul VI called Humanae Vitae. He warned of four results if the widespread use of contraceptives was accepted:

  1. General lowering of moral standards
  2. A rise in infidelity, and illegitimacy
  3. The reduction of women to objects used to satisfy men.
  4. Government coercion in reproductive matters.

Does that sound familiar?

Because it sure sounds like what’s been happening for the past 40 years.

So what happened overnight? Why is the Church’s most controversial teaching something that — suddenly — can be affirmed in the secular, public sphere without fear? The teachings didn’t change — they’ve always been awesome. Our culture didn’t change — it continues to suck. No, we owe this shift in disposition to the remarkable act of placing our hands on the desk, pushing firmly down upon it while pushing firmly up with the toes, and straightening the kneecaps until the body is aligned vertically between heaven and earth.

We stood up. The net result of the Bishops’ hardass response, the preaching directed against the mandate in parishes across the country, and the blogosphere’s immature and shrill cry of outrage was this: We are winning, and not just the battle, but hearts along with it. The fact that something as obviously wrong as the HHS mandate happened should be no surprise. In fairness to the Administration, from a brief look of the Catholic Church in America, one may not have known She is still in opposition to the use of artificial contraception. I do not simply speak of the massive level of dissent over the Church’s teaching, I speak of the general lack of confrontation the issue gets from the pulpit, whether the Bishop’s or the parish priest’s. I know it’s easier said than done, and perhaps I speak out of place, but please, priests: When 83% of your flock are in sin, it is your duty to address the issue. Will parishioners walk out on you? Without a shadow of doubt, for the Gospel is a piercing sword at times. But as the net result of standing against the HHS mandate has — thus far — been an outpouring of support and good, so will be the result of an organized stand against the stupidity of artificial contraception. We have learned the power of saying firmly what we believe, and not giving a damn what the world thinks of it. Let us now use it to confront the heart of the modern world — our miserable view of the human body, our utter boredom with the act of sex, and our hostility towards new life.



TOPICS: Apologetics; Current Events; Religion & Culture; Religion & Politics
KEYWORDS: badcatholic
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-52 next last
To: Dr. Brian Kopp

Wow! Great blog.


21 posted on 02/12/2012 7:11:41 AM PST by paterfamilias
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: usconservative

“I’ve lost count over the past few days of the number of women who claim to be Catholics”...

There is going to be a separating of the sheep from the goats.

There are those who “weren’t with us” all along.

Those who have been steadfast all along will grow more so.


22 posted on 02/12/2012 7:15:45 AM PST by Running On Empty (The three sorriest words: "It's too late")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp

Ping for later


23 posted on 02/12/2012 7:20:57 AM PST by ALPAPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp
Letter from the Bishops, re-published from your blog. Thought most would find it interesting here:

Dear Brother Bishops,

As you have heard, today President Obama announced an upcoming change in the federal rule requiring most private health plans in the U.S. to include coverage for contraception, sterilization and some drugs that can induce abortions.

The Administration’s stated intent is to protect a broader class of religious employers from being forced to pay directly for objectionable coverage or to list it in the plans they offer their own employees. But it does not meet our standard of respecting the religious liberty and moral convictions of all stakeholders in the health coverage transaction. Therefore we remain committed to rigorous legislative guarantees of religious freedom.

We remain fully committed to the defense of our religious liberty and we strongly protest the violation of our freedom of religion that has not been addressed. We continue to work for the repeal of the mandate. We have grave reservations that the government is intruding in the definition of who is and who is not a religious employer. Upon further study we are very concerned that serious issues still remain and we have found numerous problems which we will raise in this letter.

We heard of the change this morning. President Obama called our USCCB president, Cardinal-Designate Dolan, to tell him that significant changes would be made in the final federal rule in an effort to accommodate our concerns about the religious freedom of our institutions. He outlined these changes, and said the Administration would be in further dialogue with religious organizations to work out the questions that remain unanswered. He said White House officials were willing to meet with us to discuss the issue further. Later in the morning, senior White House staff came to our Conference headquarters to do so and to answer questions. Shortly after the announcement by President Obama, Conference staff held a conference call with staff from Catholic Relief Services, Catholic Charities, USA, Catholic Health Association, the University of Notre Dame and the Association of Catholic Colleges and Universities.

At present our understanding of the new final rule, at least part of which is expected to appear in the Federal Register next week, is as follows.

The Administration has indicated it is retaining the narrow, four-pronged exemption for “religious employers” such as churches and houses of worship. There is a serious concern that the four-pronged exemption would become a precedent for other regulations. However, it will also offer a new policy covering “non-exempt” religious organizations such as charities and hospitals. Our concern remains strong that the government is creating its own definitions of who is “religious enough” for full protection. Secular employers must provide coverage for contraception, sterilization and abortion inducing drugs.

Non-exempt religious organizations that object to these services may offer a health plan without them – that is, they do not list the services in their plan and they do not pay directly for them. But the insurance issuer selling this plan must offer to add these services for each of the organization’s employees free of charge (that is, no additional premium and no co-pay or out-of-pocket expenses). We are told that this is not to be seen as a “rider” – rather, these items will simply be covered, but without the employer endorsing or directly providing them. However, it remains unclear as to how insurers will be compensated for the cost of these items, with some commentators suggesting that such compensation will ultimately be derived from the premiums paid by the religious employer. This lack of clarity is a grave concern.

These latter (religious but non-exempt) employers will have a year (up to August 2013) to work out final details of this, with a further rule to be issued by the Administration before the end of that period. The advantage is that we can take part in this dialogue; the down side is that we may not know the final actual details of some aspects of the policy until well into the New Year.

All insurers without exception are covered by the mandate to provide these services without charge. At this point it does not seem that a religiously affiliated health plan (e.g., one run by a Catholic health system) can be offered to the general public and exclude the objectionable services, since most of the public is supposed to have these services included by their insurers automatically.

We are presented with a serious dilemma regarding self-insured plans, where a religious organization is both employer and insurer, and regarding student health plans offered by religious colleges and universities. It appears that such plans will be required to offer the objectionable coverage.

It seems clear there is no exemption for Catholic and other individuals who work for secular employers; for such individuals who own or operate a business; or for employers who have a moral (not religious) objection to some procedures such as the abortifacient drug Ella. This presents a grave moral problem that must be addressed, and it is unclear whether this combination of policies creates a mandate for contraception, sterilization and abortion inducing drugs covering more of the U.S. population than originally proposed.

The indication from the Administration that this process will be worked out into the coming year is of grave concern. Prolonging the process of the protection of religious liberty over multiple months is not beneficial or effective for the clear principle of religious liberty and freedom from coercion. In particular, the clear assertion of religious liberty is a matter of justice for our employees.

As you can see we have a great deal of work ahead of us. We need to study the proposal quickly, carefully and with all legitimate viewpoints represented in order to come to firmer conclusions. The Catholic Church has been the leading voice for religious freedom and moral conviction on this issue, and we want to commend all the bishops for the good work that has been done to bring this urgent issue to the very peak of public awareness. Our task is far from over. We remain fully determined to work strenuously with our many partners in service to the full exercise of the right to religious liberty in our country.

Our brother bishops permit us to repeat the principles that are guiding us:

First, there is the respect for religious liberty. No government has the right to intrude into the affairs of the Church, much less coerce, the Church faithful individuals to engage in or cooperate in any way with immoral practices.

Second, it is the place of the Church, not of government to define its religious identity and ministry.

Third, we continue to oppose the underlying policy of a government mandate for purchase or promotion of contraception, sterilization or abortion inducing drugs.

Thank you, brothers, for your commitment to work with everyone concerned about religious freedom in our society and to advance our principled goals. We will continue to keep you informed as we study this issue and learn more about this policy and our opportunities for its correction. We heartily welcome your observations and continued prayers and support.

Cardinal-designate Timothy M. Dolan

Archbishop of New York, President

24 posted on 02/12/2012 7:25:52 AM PST by usconservative (When The Ballot Box No Longer Counts, The Ammunition Box Does. (What's In Your Ammo Box?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Running On Empty
Zero disagreement with your post.

Let me just say that whatever one's denomination, faith based systems such as Catholicism are not "menu's" from which to choose.

One either subscribes to, and adhere's to the tenants of one's faith fully, or one stops calling themselves members of that faith.

In my (narrow) mind, it's that simple.

25 posted on 02/12/2012 7:30:29 AM PST by usconservative (When The Ballot Box No Longer Counts, The Ammunition Box Does. (What's In Your Ammo Box?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp

**We stood up. The net result of the Bishops’ hardass response, the preaching directed against the mandate in parishes across the country, and the blogosphere’s immature and shrill cry of outrage was this: We are winning, and not just the battle, but hearts along with it.**

Amen to that!


26 posted on 02/12/2012 8:13:01 AM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

Apparently my ability to write at a college freshman level is in question.


27 posted on 02/12/2012 8:26:48 AM PST by Anoreth (It's not stupid, it's advanced!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

Apparently my ability to write at a college freshman level is in question.


28 posted on 02/12/2012 8:27:39 AM PST by Anoreth (It's not stupid, it's advanced!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

Apparently my ability to write at a college freshman level is in question.


29 posted on 02/12/2012 8:39:24 AM PST by Anoreth (It's not stupid, it's advanced!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg

Impressive! Is he also a FReeper by any chance?


30 posted on 02/12/2012 10:53:22 AM PST by Brian Kopp DPM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Anoreth

There are too many highly-sensitive commentators for them all to be the author, so I don’t understand the carrying-on. Any writing produced for the public can take comments on its content or presentation ... or it ought to be kept to one’s private journal.

If the author is a bright, conservative youth, he’d recognize “P.J. naps on the Urban Dictionary” as something of a compliment.


31 posted on 02/12/2012 11:25:18 AM PST by Tax-chick (Fire in the sky, lava in the ocean ... waiting for the next explosion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp; Tax-chick; Anoreth
Thank you for posting this article. I am very thankful that the Catholic Church is taking this stand. You are not alone but I fear that the Protestant voice will not be as loud as the Catholic voice will be...so thank you for taking the lead on this issue.

My wife and I became convinced to not use birth control after reading a little book called, “The Bible and Birth Control” by Charles Provan. I would strongly suggest reading this book (under 100 pages) to all of my friends on Freerepublic...

God bless

32 posted on 02/12/2012 12:21:58 PM PST by WorldviewDad (following God instead of culture)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

He’s trying too hard.


33 posted on 02/12/2012 1:19:36 PM PST by Anoreth (It's not stupid, it's advanced!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: WorldviewDad

I have that book. It is very detailed and persuasive, if one is at all willing to be persuaded.


34 posted on 02/12/2012 1:52:33 PM PST by Tax-chick (Fire in the sky, lava in the ocean ... waiting for the next explosion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: WorldviewDad
Here's a wonderful children's book:

New book makes kids PRO-LIFE

35 posted on 02/12/2012 2:13:50 PM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: WorldviewDad
Angel in the Waters -- New Pro-Life book for children [Tissue Alert]
36 posted on 02/12/2012 2:16:15 PM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: WorldviewDad
My wife and I became convinced to not use birth control after reading a little book called, “The Bible and Birth Control” by Charles Provan. I would strongly suggest reading this book (under 100 pages) to all of my friends on Freerepublic...

Excellent, thanks!

I talked to Charles Provan years ago and bought a case of these books to give away when we taught NFP classes, as it was especially helpful with mixed couples. I just gave away three last night!

I still have aabout 20 copies on my book shelf. If anyone wants one, please send me a PM and I'll get it out in the mail, free of charge.

37 posted on 02/12/2012 2:24:38 PM PST by Brian Kopp DPM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

The author of this book lives in Front Royal VA. My oldest son picked up a copy at Christendom College during his first semester at Christendom last fall for my daughter, who is a “huge fan” of Regina Doman and all her books, for Christmas. To my daughter’s delight, the book was signed. A very nice little book.


38 posted on 02/12/2012 2:31:33 PM PST by Brian Kopp DPM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

The author of this book lives in Front Royal VA. My oldest son picked up a copy at Christendom College during his first semester at Christendom last fall for my daughter, who is a “huge fan” of Regina Doman and all her books, for Christmas. To my daughter’s delight, the book was signed. A very nice little book.


39 posted on 02/12/2012 2:50:34 PM PST by Brian Kopp DPM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp

I don’t know if he’s a freeper. I almost hope not. Unless he’s getting academic credit for the research that goes into his blog,I’d worry about the energy his studies are getting. I think he has verty great potential; Steubenville is a fine school; I want him to develop his skillz and his knowledge base and to spend some time with smart, pious, older, and wiser folk.


40 posted on 02/12/2012 2:57:47 PM PST by Mad Dawg (Jesus, I trust in you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-52 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson