Replies

The one part of this I don't get is that it DOES appear that a member of the Catholic clergy DID violate the confidential relationship he is supposed to have with (shudder) Daschle. I'm not Catholic, but if my LDS bishop did this--aired his opinion about one of my positions on something, so very publically--I'd have a HUGE problem with that. And I think my church would too.

Well, how do you address it when the problem is that Daschle is publically claiming to be Catholic as part of his campaign pitch. If he refuses to stop, and refuse to stop endorsing abortion, you are forced to make your disagreement public.

In Catholic theology, Daschle’s actions give what is called scandal. It makes it look like the Church doesn’t mean it when they say they are pro-life, if they allow a notorious pro abort to claim he is a good Catholic to get votes. The faithful are scandalized by that, and are often confused about just what the Church really teaches.

To address that, you have to do it in the public sphere. Daschle’s sin isn’t just a personal act, it is deeply and inextricably intertwined with his public acts of governance and electioneering. The only way to cure that harm, is to do so publicly, as a last resort. Given the length of the dialog it is fair to call this a last resort.

However, I don't think any bishop or stake president in our church could or would go public condemning any particular member like this, or attempt this kind of...extortion.

What would happen if, after the excommunication, the man kept claiming to be LDS in good standing, even if he didn’t participate because he was excommunicated? Would they just let those claims stand uncontested?

I'm just uncomfortable with a member of the clergy doing it. There's supposed to be a private relationship there.

There is, but one of the explicit purposes for excommunication in the Church has always been to cure public scandal, and to protect the faithful from a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

patent +AMDG

In Catholic theology, Daschle’s actions give what is called scandal. It makes it look like the Church doesn’t mean it when they say they are pro-life, if they allow a notorious pro abort to claim he is a good Catholic to get votes. The faithful are scandalized by that, and are often confused about just what the Church really teaches.

To address that, you have to do it in the public sphere. Daschle’s sin isn’t just a personal act, it is deeply and inextricably intertwined with his public acts of governance and electioneering. The only way to cure that harm, is to do so publicly, as a last resort. Given the length of the dialog it is fair to call this a last resort.

Great summary, Patent, thanks.

I'm still not certin that, as Sinkspur noted on another related thread:

"On the surface, Carlson is trying to keep this a private matter, and hopes that Daschle might get the message.

"In reality, however, the bishop has obviously leaked his letter for public consumption."

I'm not sure either way.

the problem is that Daschle is publically claiming to be Catholic as part of his campaign pitch. If he refuses to stop, and refuse to stop endorsing abortion, you are forced to make your disagreement public. ...What would happen if, after the excommunication, the man kept claiming to be LDS in good standing, even if he didn’t participate because he was excommunicated? Would they just let those claims stand uncontested?

You have a point, and I don't know the answer. Every year we have interviews with our bishop to answer questions fundamental to our worthiness to be members of our church, about whether we are keeping the commandments, attending our meetings, taking proper care of our families, et cetera. Being involved in pro-abortion activities in any way is a definite no-no to us. There has been a prominent case recently of a MINO (Mormon in Name Only) who was publically challenging our doctrines--not on the abortion rights issue, but on a matter of history. He made it clear, in public, that he was only wanting to stay in our church for social reasons--he didn't believe what we believe. SLAP! When he went out of his way to make the excommunication or disfellowship proceedings by the church against him public, the hearings were put off. Haven't heard a word since, so I don't know if they reined him in somehow or ex'd him or if they're just letting things sit. Had he kept pushing, though, I suppose we would have had no choice but to make his excommunication a public matter.

We prefer to do things in a quiet, private, dignified manner, as I suppose the Catholic church prefers as wel, but if someone left us NO CHOICE we could play hardball. A Daschle in our midst would no doubt make us do that. Oh, shudder, what must it be like to have a Daschle in your midst!? My major annoyances are people in my church who gossip or fight endlessly over whether chocolate is allowed or not. (Sheesh.) Compared to a Daschle who publically fights against all your religion teaches, that's not really important!

I see now that you all really have no choice anymore. Daschle is killing innocent babies with his actions. There really is no way around that...doesn't a plan to murder trump the confidentiality of the confessional?