Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Cardinal Dolan: We’re not in the business of being “in touch” with popular opinion
Hotair ^ | 04/01/2013 | Ed Morrissey

Posted on 04/01/2013 9:00:55 AM PDT by SeekAndFind

It's amazing how many commentators seem fixated on judging religious institutions through poll questions, but Cardinal Timothy Dolan pointed out the obvious in his Easter appearance on ABC's This Week. George Stephanopoulos challenged Dolan about a recent poll of Catholics, which showed that 60% felt that the church had fallen out of touch with the views of Catholics in the US. Dolan reminded viewers that the purpose of the faith isn't to change teachings based on polls — and that means that sometimes people will find the church "out of touch":

CLICK ABOVE LINK FOR THE VIDEO

During an interview for “This Week,” Archbishop of New York Cardinal Timothy Dolan told ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos that the Catholic Church’s very nature means it will be — from time to time – out of touch with the concerns of its followers.

“Sometimes by nature, the Church has got to be out of touch with concerns, because we’re always supposed to be thinking of the beyond, the eternal, the changeless,” Dolan said. “Our major challenge is to continue in a credible way to present the eternal concerns to people in a timeless attractive way. And sometimes there is a disconnect – between what they’re going through and what Jesus and his Church is teaching. And that’s a challenge for us.”

Dolan was responding to a question from Stephanopoulos about a recent ABC News/Washington Post poll, which found that 60 percent of Catholics “describe the church as ‘out of touch’ with the views of Catholics in America.”

Stephanopoulos also asked Dolan about the church’s position on same-sex marriage. Dolan explained that the church isn’t anti-anybody, but the sacramental character of marriage has a specific purpose and definition that the church cannot abandon:

Stephanopoulos also asked Dolan what the Catholic Church can say to gays and lesbians, who feel unwelcomed by the Church, which does not support same-sex marriage.

“Well, the first thing I’d say to them is, ‘I love you, too. And God loves you. And you are made in God’s image and likeness. And – and we – we want your happiness. But – and you’re entitled to friendship.’ But we also know that God has told us that the way to happiness, that – especially when it comes to sexual love – that is intended only for a man and woman in marriage, where children can come about naturally,” Dolan said. “We got to be – we got to do better to see that our defense of marriage is not reduced to an attack on gay people. And I admit, we haven’t been too good at that. We try our darndest to make sure we’re not an anti-anybody.”

This focus on issue-driven polling and religious teachings continues the kind of media approach that became very apparent during the papal conclave. The pundits seem confused as to the purpose of religious faith in general, and the Catholic Church and the papacy in particular. They want to keep applying paradigms suited for popular governance to institutions that exist to teach eternal truth — because whether or not one believes in the teachings of the Catholic Church or any other religious doctrine, that’s what they claim to teach. That is why most of them missed what actually was at stake in the Vatican this month, and what the outcome actually means.

The debate over legalizing SSM makes perfect sense in the popular governance/election paradigm. As people change their minds on any question of government policy, the relative popularity of each position has great significance for politicians and political parties. For religious institutions, though, that’s at best a secondary issue, and only relevant to whether or not effective catechism (teaching of the faith) is taking place. A religion that changes doctrine based on popular opinion becomes a club with a high name-recognition value, and has no real long-term purpose.

The issue at the papal conclave was never about whether to change doctrine on marriage. It was about improving the catechism and expanding evangelization through example and the proclamation of the Gospel, whether or not one finds it “in touch” with current popular opinion. The election of Pope Francis has already proven successful in drawing attention to the evangelization envisioned by Saint Francis of Assisi, who once said, “Proclaim the Gospel — use words if necessary.” We shall see if more effective evangelization results, and whether that impacts popular opinion by more effective teaching among Catholics as to the purpose of the sacrament of marriage. Dolan hit this one out of the park.


TOPICS: Catholic; Current Events; Religion & Culture; Religion & Politics
KEYWORDS: cardinaldolan; catho0lic; dolan; polls; popularopinion
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-27 last
To: SeekAndFind

bumpus ad summus


21 posted on 04/01/2013 11:08:06 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("You can observe a lot just by watchin'." - Yogi Berra)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shove_it
E xtremely
L ibertine
C ult of
A ntinomianism

22 posted on 04/01/2013 11:18:38 AM PDT by lightman (If the Patriarchate of the East held a state like the Vatican I would apply for political asylum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

He talks a good game, but his actions tell another story.

Inviting the moral horror biden for “Communion and Coffee” was an abomination.


23 posted on 04/01/2013 11:42:24 AM PDT by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cothrige

Very well put.


24 posted on 04/01/2013 1:27:24 PM PDT by Sans-Culotte ( Pray for Obama- Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: cothrige
Esactly right.

This may be related: some great thinky person (was it maybe Jacques Ellul?) said that people usually pair together Religion=Magic and Science=Technology, when actually Religion and Science make a true pair, and Magic and Technology make another.

Why? Because Religion and Science are based on an obedient search for truth, i.e. an obedient conformity to the known facts. We respect the facts; we live in accordance, or in harmony with them. We make logical conclusions from them; we may even draw reasonable inferences from them. But the facts rule: the facts are "magisterial".

Magic and Technology, on the other hand, are based on the usefulness of something: "I'm doing this because I think it'll work. That is, it may work for me." It is not based on a desire to actually respect the bigger facts, the bigger laws: empirical technology, like magic, may not be based on a coherent and fully-fleshed -out understanding at all, or even a desire for understanding: only a desire for immediate-term profit, advantage, gain.

So if something is a religious/moral fact (e.g. "the directly intended killing of an innocent person is always prohibited as murder") it is something you have to obediently live by, whether it "works" for you or not.

25 posted on 04/01/2013 1:58:29 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("You can observe a lot just by watchin'." - Yogi Berra)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Very interesting, and I think that makes definite sense, at least from one perspective. Of course, I may be biased. I happen to be a person of faith, and as far as my incredibly stunted mind is concerned, most technology is magic anyway. Even old technology. More than fifty years ago somebody figured out how to take a moving picture with sound and send it invisibly through the air to a box in people’s living rooms. Magic! Gotta be magic. :-)


26 posted on 04/01/2013 4:22:17 PM PDT by cothrige
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
"...But we also know that God has told us that the way to happiness, that - especially when it comes to sexual love – that is intended only for a man and woman in marriage, where children can come about naturally,”

He was clear on the doctrine, but it just saddened me that he was forced into a defensive position, saying to advocators of same-sex marriage: "I love you, too. And God loves you. And you are made in God’s image and likeness. And – and we – we want your happiness. ... defense of marriage is not reduced to an attack on gay people..." etc. All that is certainly true and we are forced to say it over and over.

Anyone who is against same-sex marriage is NOT on the attack, that person is in a DEFENSIVE position at the get-go. It is those who seek approval for the gay lifestyle who are on the attack.

Just my reflection on the state of affairs.
27 posted on 04/03/2013 7:45:08 AM PDT by Nanny7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-27 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