Good News or Fox News, which is it Cardinal Dolan?
Posted on Sunday, June 10, 2012 at 09:51 AM
RSS 
Recent Posts
- Daily Mail unloads on 'drunken young' Paddys with booze-baiting rant - British tabloid continues its anti Irish attitude
- Marco Rubio: 'If immigration bill gives Cubans immigration rights, it kills the bill. I'm done' - VIDEO
- Diaspora should work both ways - time for global Irish to vote
- Ireland needs a new James Joyce - new voice of the Irish people is on the way
- Fox News Lou Dobbs panel: selfish working mothers are destroying the natural order and America
Archives
Nothing hardens hearts like the feeling of being left behind. There appears to be a lot of that feeling about at the moment and it's all rather worrying. The sense of being abandoned, or entirely dismissed, seems to be engulfing our main Christian denominations in particular just now, if their increasing howls of protest are to be believed.
I don't discount the power or influence of the Christian Right, or their sincerity, and so I'm worried by all the saber rattling about the 'war' and 'attacks' on Christianity, the Bible, Catholicism and all other Christian denominations that we keep hearing, from coast to coast.
They've been all over the news for months, these headline grabbing claims: the 'war' on Christmas, the 'war' on marriage, the 'war' on Catholicism. To hear him tell it, Cardinal Dolan was awarded a red hat when what he needed was a helmet.
Cynics might suggest that all of this is just an orchestrated campaign by Christian conservatives to discredit the president in his re-election year. But if that were true, it's a very high stakes and dangerous ploy for such comparatively meagre rewards.
Most concerning to Irish Americans here has been the continuing alignment of the institutional church and its leadership with the political hard right.
We have watched with increasing discomfort as our own Cardinal Dolan has become the biggest cheerleader of them all, the go-to guy with the media ready soundbite, the man who can be depended upon to unleash the most appalling rhetoric with the greatest ease. How did it come to this?
Last month Cardinal Dolan claimed that that the White House was 'strangling' the church over its contraception policies. Yes, he actually said strangling. Public policy makers found themselves re-branded as serial killers. Again, how is this helpful? These do not sound like the words of a spiritual conciliator seeking justice, these sound like the words of a political operative seeking traction.
It's an occupational hazard that disproportionally affects Americas spiritual leaders. They start out preaching the Good News but end up spreading Fox News.
In the past month the Cardinal has attacked the president, the White House, the gay community, the survivors of abuse by priests, The New York Times, and even the nuns. At this point both his supporters and critics could be forgiven for wondering who's not on his black list?
I wonder who is served most by all this divisive language and saber rattling and I doubt if its Jesus. It seems to me the people who most benefit from sowing division are the ones who manipulate our religious faith as a lure to get us into the voting booth.
For decades the religious right here have fixated on contraception, abortion, creationism and the gays. Cynics might say that this is to prevent us all from fixating on Health Care, Social Welfare, Education, Poverty and Equality.
Economic and social justice, the Religious Right teaches, are the goals of socialists, who are the agents of Satan. In that way the Religious Right have been very successful at getting the disadvantaged to vote against their own interests.
Meanwhile as the old guard of the church find their power and influence eroding in one arena they appear to be ratcheting up the rhetoric in another. But they may be overreaching. Even America's nuns have found themselves walloped with a crozier lately as the leadership seem intent to take the fight to literally everyone who might dare to articulate an opposing viewpoint. The thing is that would be most of the nation and the world now.
It would help if Cardinal Dolan could remember who he answers to. Perhaps his congregation need to remind him it's not Roger Ailes.
90 comments
BrianO | Jun 12, 2012, 03:40 PM EDT
So Andrew, first off if you have read enough of Cahirs articles the answer to your Question would be ---deliberately deceptive, second what is our definition of social justice. thank you.
Report abuse
eiriamach | Jun 12, 2012, 03:37 PM EDT
Yes again, gone are the days when Thomas Merton (before his life as a Cistercian monk and spiritual writer) could hang around chatting in NYC coffee shops with blacklisted communists or socialists imported from war-ravaged Europe! The spirit of Catholicism was ecumenical, and the spirit of politics was free speech and freedom of inquiry rediscovered. People learned from each other, and no one was cast out with a nasty label. These days, guilt by association seems to be an accepted attitude and we need to be ever so careful.
Report abuse
eiriamach | Jun 12, 2012, 03:27 PM EDT
Yes, Andrew007, there's a software bug in IC com boxes. The 07/Jun 12, 2012 box had NO NAME attached to it when I first saw it. IF you post after a no-name box, your name gets attached to the no-name box as well as to your own com box. This has happened to others, including me, so we know about it but can't fix it. By experience also I've learned that IC rejects postings with Internet addresses. But just Google "The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life" and on the home page, you'll find a link to "2012 American Values Survey." You can download the entire report or view the click-through presentation, etc. The other report I cited was the one I thought you referred to at the Gallup site. Just Google (or other search engine): Gallup poll "Republicans Remain Disproportionately White and Religious."
Report abuse
BrianO | Jun 12, 2012, 03:25 PM EDT
Andrew, it was mine sometimes your name doesn't show up on the post
Report abuse
Andrew007 | Jun 12, 2012, 02:48 PM EDT
Umm, there's been a mistake. I wrote the post headed by "Andrew007/Jun 12, 2012, 02:40 PM EDT"; but I certainly did NOT write the post headed by "Andrew007/Jun 12, 2012, 01:52 PM EDT". I don't know what happened there, unless someone's using my Handle of "Andrew007" when they shouldn't.
Report abuse
Andrew007 | Jun 12, 2012, 02:40 PM EDT
@eiriamach: Very interesting. Do you have the webpage addresses for those surveys? I do agree with you regarding the GOP far right alienating many - the anti-Democrat hysteria and even violent ranting of at least some of the pundits is quite shocking. I believe this reflects the increasing intolerance of what passes for the "Far Left" in the US. I have to say that ever since my political awakening in the 90's, I've been increasingly alarmed by the intolerant divisive vitriol coming from both sides of the political, religious and socio-economic divide, as I have also by the degree to which commentators are prepared to use untruths and hostile personal attacks against opponents (regarding them not as opponents but as the “enemy”). I partly blame the media for this (incl. commentators like Cahir), but also morally compromised political and religious leaders who evidently believe the ends justify the means ... BTW, I’ve recently noticed you replied to an earlier comment of mine, I’ll reply when able.
Report abuse
Andrew007 | Jun 12, 2012, 01:52 PM EDT
eiriamach how can we be polarized, we have had 3 1/2 years of "together we can" from the great unifier Barrack Hussien Obama. Besides unifying the country we are also post racial, and if those evil business owners would just do as he says and hire more people the economy would be just fine.
Report abuse
eiriamach | Jun 12, 2012, 11:26 AM EDT
The June 4 Pew Research Center report shows us highly polarized on values since 1987. On the social safety net, the gap between Republicans and Democrats is now 41%, on labor unions 37%, on equal opportunity 33%, and on immigration 24%. Repub support for the social safety net has dropped from 62% in 1987 to 40% in 2012, and Independents' support has dropped from 70% to 59%, while Dem support has dropped only 4 points from 79%. In agreeing with "old-fashioned values about family and marriage," Repubs have dropped only 4 points from 92% in 1987, while Dems have dropped from 86% to 60% and Independents from 86% to 72%. Voters who "lean" Democrat are 48%; 40% "lean" Republican. Hispanics vote independent by 46%; African Americans vote Dem by 69%. The gap between men and women: 43% of men and 33% of women are independent, while 27% of men and 37% of women are Dems, and men and women are evenly Repubs (25% & 24%), and female voters outnumber male by 10%. While only 22% of all respondents identify themselves as liberal and 36% as conservative, 37%-- again the largest number-- self-identify as moderate. Conservatives don't have any election in their pockets because GOP far-right drift has alienated so many.
Report abuse
eiriamach | Jun 12, 2012, 11:19 AM EDT
About that Gallup poll, IrishAndProud, you should expect confused results when respondents are given categories like "liberal Republican" and "conservative Democrat" as choices! Gallup doesn't tell us much. But looking at both Gallup and the current Pew polls, I find the following: *1) Independents, not conservatives, will decide the next election. While Dems (32%) still outnumber the GOP (24%), independents form a larger group (38%, up from 29% just since 1990). *2) Polarization on religion and values will play a huge role in the election (a flight from polarities probably accounts for much of the surge in Independents), with 68% of the GOP identifying themselves as "Conservative" and 38% of Dems as "Liberal." *3) On religion and values, independents are far closer to Dems than to the GOP (see Gallup poll Sept. 1, 2010, "Republicans Remain Disproportionately White and Religious" and Pew Report June 6, 2012 on Values). Current (May-June 2012) Pew research shows that white evangelical voters favor Romney by a significant margin. Among black Protestants and religiously unaffiliated voters, however, Obama has a wide lead over Romney. Religious affiliation and lack of it closely matches the social/values positions of voters.
Report abuse
EamonnDublin | Jun 12, 2012, 06:08 AM EDT
Mr. O'Doherty - How many times did you vomit, overwhelmed by hysterical anger, shortness of breath, and the red mist coming down, before you managed to finish your latest rant? Éamonn, Dublin, Ireland.
Report abuse
IrishAndProud | Jun 12, 2012, 04:06 AM EDT
Oh, and get this opening of an article from none other than the Washington Post. Things have gotten so bad for Barack Obama, that even a left-wing pillar like the Post states thusly (and this is for you, Cahir!): "It has been a Junius Horribilis for President Obama. Job growth has stalled, the Democrats have been humiliated in Wisconsin, the attorney general is facing a contempt-of-Congress citation, talks with Pakistan have broken down, Bill Clinton is contradicting Obama, Mitt Romney is outraising him, Democrats and Republicans alike are complaining about a “cascade” of national-security leaks from his administration, and he is now on record as saying that the “private sector is doing fine. Could it get any worse? Early Monday morning, Obama learned that it could. His aides delivered the news to him that his commerce secretary had been cited for a felony hit-and-run after allegedly crashing his car three times over the weekend. In one incident, the previously obscure Cabinet officer apparently rear-ended a Buick, spoke to the car’s occupants, then hit the vehicle again as he left." Whew! Obama is one and done!
Report abuse
Andrew007 | Jun 12, 2012, 12:47 AM EDT
Part 2: #3). Cahir claimed that Christian opposition to Obama “… is just an orchestrated campaign by Christian conservatives to discredit the president in his re-election year”. Wrong! Many Christians are opposing Obama not because of his “socialism” or his race (although admittedly some, being misled gullible bigots, are), but rather because of the increasingly immoral and even anti-Christian public stance that he and his administration has taken in recent years. This doesn’t mean that they agree with or belong to the GOP, but that they are increasingly offended by Obama’s pandering to the immoral minority, and taking THEIR side against those who seek to defend traditional morality and the ancient institutions of marriage and family.
#4) Cahir claimed the “opposing viewpoint [to the RC leadership is held by] most of the nation and the world now”. Tell me, is there ANY evidence to support this, or is this just another example of a self-important opinion trying to inflate itself to claim a moral authority it clearly doesn’t possess?
Report abuse
Andrew007 | Jun 12, 2012, 12:23 AM EDT
What a ridiculous article! The author made numerous foolish claims that rather conveniently overlooks many facts, to the extent that it makes one wonder if he’s truly ignorant or being deliberately deceptive.
#1). Cahir claimed “Economic and social justice, the Religious Right teaches, are the goals of socialists”? Hardly! Social justice is a key foundational value of Judeao-Christianity, as the Bible repeatedly says “do unto others as you would have them do to you” and Jesus Christ stated that to “love one another” is the second greatest of all commandments (Matt. 22:36-40). His claim also ignores the fact that there are many “Christian Socialists”, and that the churches (incl. RC) are the creators of almost all charities, and Christians of all walks have been at the forefront (and often originators) of virtually all social justice movements in the West in the past few hundred years.
#2). Cahir claimed “For decades the religious right here have fixated on contraception, abortion, creationism and the gays … to prevent us all from fixating on Health Care, Social Welfare, Education, Poverty and Equality”. Rubbish! Christianity is not just about love for one another (i.e. compassion and social justice), but more importantly it’s about love and fear of the Lord God (the greatest commandment according to JC – Ibid, Matt.), and thus necessarily living a life that seeks holiness – and this includes private and public morality. Christian holiness and compassion exist as two halves of the same faith – you can’t truly have one without the other.
Report abuse
kilgara | Jun 11, 2012, 09:36 PM EDT
O'Doherty, your political blather is oh so tiring. You speak for fringe degenerates, who are not fit to tie Cardinal Dolans' shoestrings.
Report abuse
90 Comments
Report abuse