President Barack Obama’s Blessing for “Pope” Timothy Dolan
By: Tom Deignan | Published Thursday, February 16, 2012, 12:45 PM | Updated Thursday, February 16, 2012, 12:45 PM
 |
| Archbishop Timothy Dolan (AP Photo) |
Sarah Palin saw this coming all along.
Back in 2009, Palin was all fired up about Notre Dame University’s decision to invite
President Obama – pro-choice on abortion – to speak at its graduation ceremonies. Many – not just Palin – shuddered at the thought of such a president speaking at what is arguably America’s most famous Catholic institution.
"My favorite grandpa, Clem James Sheeran, was Catholic. Irish to the core,” Palin was quoted as saying back in 2009.
“His favorite place (other than church) was
Notre Dame. I can't imagine what he would think as the university recognizes someone who contradicts the core values of the Catholic faith by promoting an anti-life agenda."
And now we have another brouhaha over Obama and Catholicism. A few weeks back, the Obama administration unveiled plans that would have compelled Catholic institutions to
provide contraception to employees. There was a compromise offered on Friday, though the damage to Obama has largely been done.
Thunderous objections have followed, though they were quite understandable. By all accounts, Obama had been warned by Irish Catholic members of his inner circle – including Vice President Joe Biden and former Chief of Staff Bill Daley – that requiring Catholic institutions to provide coverage contrary to their teaching would start a holy war.
And boy did it.
It played to the right wing belief that Obama – and really, most Democrats – are anti-religious.
Former George W. Bush speechwriter and current Washington Post columnist Michael Gerson said the edict was “delivered with a sneer,” and added that this was “the most transparently anti-Catholic maneuver by the federal government since the Blaine Amendment was proposed in 1875, a measure designed to diminish public tolerance of Romanism, then regarded as foreign, authoritarian and illiberal.”
Newt Gingrich charged that "the Obama administration is engaged in a war against religion." Mitt Romney declared this "a direct attack on religious liberty."
No doubt that this was a boneheaded move by Obama. Then again, now that this issue has become a political football, it’s easy to forget a few things.
First of all, the vast majority of
Irish Americans and other Catholics are quite liberal when it comes to contraception.
In fact, as The New York Times noted this week, “Although Archbishop Timothy M. Dolan of New York has vociferously argued that a national requirement for religiously affiliated institutions to cover birth control in their insurance plans is immoral and unacceptable, some Roman Catholic organizations in his own backyard have for 10 years been grudgingly complying with a state law making them do precisely that.”
Manhattan College and Fordham University are among the Catholic institutions that offer contraception as part of their health care packages.
And yet, the fact is, after years of backpedaling because of horrific sex abuse allegations, church leaders were actually able to take the moral high ground on this issue.
The biggest winner here seems to be New York Archbishop
Timothy Dolan. He has emerged as an outspoken and legitimate defender of religious values.
This is a role Dolan’s predecessor, Edward Cardinal Egan, never seemed to grow into. If Dolan manages to maintain this position, he could recall the more vigorous days of John Cardinal O’Connor.
This comes just as
Dolan is elevated to cardinal this Saturday. So swift and significant has Dolan’s other elevation – to significant public voice – been that the New York Daily News actually ran a long analysis outlining the circumstances under which Dolan could someday become the first American pope.
This sounds more or less absurd to me. The U.S. has enough influence on the world stage without also ruling over the Vatican.
And yet, this mere discussion is an indication of how well Dolan has managed to articulate a certain moral message, all the while retaining his gregarious, even fun-loving side.
How will this all effect Catholic voters come November?
If only we could ask Sarah Palin’s grandfather.
(Contact “Sidewalks” at
tomdeignan@earthlink.net or
facebook.com/tomdeignan)
21 Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Switch to the desktop site to post a comment.Maureen Hawkins | Feb 23, 2013, 08:38 PM EST
So, when are the American Cardinals going start throwing fits over the death penalty--which is also contrary to Church teaching? I'll believe they're morally motivated instead of just trying to draw attention away from their pedophilia protection when they start taking all Church teachings equally seriously.
ChillaKilla | May 25, 2012, 10:08 AM EDT
EKibbey says --This is what I do not get about theocracys-- Are you really that dense.. or do you just have a talent for showing it?... Try looking past your anti-Catholic prejudice and examine the issue with some logic....The CC in this case is NOT trying to ban the sin for its NON-CATHOLIC employees --They, along with those Catholics who do not want to heed its biblical teachings, CAN GO TO HELL ON THEIR OWN -- She is simply trying to protect its right to hold its longstanding beliefs against gov'mt encroachment! -- Have you seen the CC excommunicating or burning people at the stake for using abortifacients or contraceptives?? NO! But it's obvious that barrack O'theNoseWart wants to force his anti-religious beliefs and agenda on the Church, simply because he thinks he can play political games with the power once granted him. -- So who is trying to 'grap' (sic) power from whom in this case?
IrelandNorth | Feb 17, 2012, 07:05 AM EST
walleyeman! You predicate 'American' and 'socialism' as being mutually exclusive? If your a democrat, surely a majority should decide. hollabackgurl! They preach immaculate contra-ception. AMWilson! Life begins at conception, i.e. not the fertilisation of the ovum but the thinking about having a child. A verse in the Gnostic Gospel of Philip states that if a woman thinks of her lover while having sexual congress with her husband, the child will look like the lover. The purest form of contraception is sexual continence, particularly during sexual intercourse.
AMWilson | Feb 17, 2012, 01:45 AM EST
Just to clarify, the RC position on contraception is, for the most part, an extension of its position on abortion, in that most contraception is abortifacient (it keeps a fertilized egg, which the RCC defines as a human life, from implanting and growing). So when we start getting into the discussion about "legislating morality", I think the RC position on contraception debate is less about the old "misusing sex" argument, and more about what the RCC believes is the taking of a human life.
EphraimKibbey | Feb 16, 2012, 11:06 PM EST
@hollabackgurl - They don't get it. Its not BIG government to them because it is doing what THEY want. It is big government if it is doing what most people want. Did you see the Issa committee on the Blunt bill that would allow employers to deny any employee rights if they had a moral objection. No women - the ALL walked out! Keep telling it like it is!
Murph46 | Feb 16, 2012, 09:50 PM EST
So stay away from Virginia Humpback girl who won't answer any questions!
hollabackgurl | Feb 16, 2012, 07:25 PM EST
Meanwhile in Virginia they want to jam an ultrasound probe inside a woman's vagina against her will if she wants to obtain an abortion. The "small government" party sure likes to empower government to invade your personal life doesn't it?
Murph46 | Feb 16, 2012, 03:56 PM EST
Remember this about O'Bama 46% of Americans pay no taxes -his constituents.He wants to increase taxes on the top 1% who already pay 70% of the taxes.Catholics accounted for 40% of the vote in 08.If he offends them-it is at his own peril.
Scrivner | Feb 16, 2012, 02:24 PM EST
John Hogan, I love that you paraphrased a Lutheran in this discussion! Ephraim, Holleringgirl, you fall into the Obama trap, this is about control, not by the clerics, but by the apparitchiks. The current administration combines the worst of several worlds: the ideals of the old SDS (Tom & Bernadorn), the tactics of a big city machine (look, see it our way or the inspectors will be paying you many visits) and crony capitalism (Goldman Sachs, Solendra, AIG, Chase, GE). Look beyond the immediate and try to see the strategy.
EphraimKibbey | Feb 16, 2012, 01:15 PM EST
Sorry - awe = are! Remember the lessons of the prohibition amendment and of our on-going war on drugs -"You can not legislate morals." They can only be taught through example and are distroyed by hiporacy among those teaching them.
EphraimKibbey | Feb 16, 2012, 01:05 PM EST
This is what I do not get about theocracys. If the government outlaws sin and punishes sin in this world, where does that leave free will upon which the concept of sin is based? Where does that leave "judgement is mine sayefh the Lord?" The Taliban executed women who sinned according to their teachings and laws. Both the RC and Evangelicals want to make their religious beliefs the law of the land. If those who break these beliefs will be judged in heaven, why do they need laws here on earth - aew they worried that their nonsensical teachings will be (and are being) seen for what they really are - just another group's attempt to grap power over the liberties of private individuals.
rainbowbrew | Feb 16, 2012, 12:34 PM EST
"Simple. We as Americans decide what is best for our personal well being. Not some socialist." Yoour joking aren't you. We have a repub candidate that wants to codify religion and tell us what we can do based on religion. We have the right tryig much to control my like. The republicans here in the states are all about control (eg drug war). the catholics have been trying to control women for a long time. The RCC wants more babies becasue there is a probablility that they will become catholics. It is all about money to the catholics. Obama was facing this as a state issue not a religious isse because there is supposed to be separation of church and state. The frilly dressers have no ground upon which to stand.
Murph46 | Feb 16, 2012, 12:05 PM EST
Very,Very good Hogan!
EphraimKibbey | Feb 16, 2012, 11:55 AM EST
William Levada, the current Grand Inquisitor, will beat Dolan for next Pope. That was Ratzinger's old job and he seems to be surrounding himself with very conservative clerics. O'bama picked up two or three approval percentage points since the contraception coverage disscussion last week. If, between Poverty, Social Security and Unemployment Compensation, your statistic of 46 % of Americans are put finncially automatically in O'Bama's Camp, perhaps the GOP is ill advised to offend the 98% of American women who have used contraception. Americans have long recognised the misogyny of RC doctrine and Americans are now waking up to the misogyny of the GOP with its constant attacks on women's health nationally and at the state level. What will be the next voting block that the GOP offends?
John G. Hogan | Feb 16, 2012, 11:51 AM EST
First Soetoro came for the Roman Catholics, and I did nothing.............
hollabackgurl | Feb 16, 2012, 11:02 AM EST
On the planet I'm living on I find the protectors of child rapists preaching to women about contraception to be a moral obscenity. When all the implicated bishops and the Pope resign, ther replacements will have standing to preach to others. Catholics use contraception, get over it.
walleyeman | Feb 16, 2012, 11:01 AM EST
Simple. We as Americans decide what is best for our personal well being. Not some socialist.
Murph46 | Feb 16, 2012, 11:00 AM EST
donal1951 well said but I believe you can post till you are blue in the face before hollabackgurl will fully understand.These are the people who blindly support the social govt. of our current admin.Remember 46% of America gets a free ride-no taxes!
donal1951 | Feb 16, 2012, 09:51 AM EST
I am a supporter of birth control, so long as the method is not an abortificant and I am a convert to Orthodoxy from the Roman Catholic Church. I was angered by President Obama's decree, not only on 1st Amendment grounds, but because the federal government was defining what must be in a health insurance policy paid for by a nongovernmental entity. What's next, requiring dental insurance with no coverage limits?
Murph46 | Feb 16, 2012, 09:43 AM EST
Hullanbuckgirl what planet are you from ,that was O'Bama trying to shove Obamacare down peoples throats.If not,why the sudden reversal of policy when he found it went against the flow?As I said yesterday Obama's 2008 was 40% catholic.They say the undecided vote will make the difference in 2012,but not if he angers the 40% by going against their beliefs.
hollabackgurl | Feb 16, 2012, 09:34 AM EST
This was an orchestrated campaign by the bishops to try to damage Obama's standing. I don't agree that it harmed him though. Gallup finds the president's standing among Catholics basically unchanged since the furor engineered by Benedict's hand-picked reactionary bishops over contraception. What this really did was reveal that church leadership are now spiritual shills for the GOP and out of touch with the daily realities of their own congregation. Not to mention the anachronistic sight of old men who allowed decades of sex abuse to flourish (and who, whilst remaining celibate, tell women what they can and can not do with their bodies).