During the presidential campaign of 2016, TV news coverage showed Hillary Clinton speaking at a number of black Protestant churches – and speaking not in the more or less secular church basement, but in the sanctuary itself, apparently during Sunday services. This reminded me that we would never find anything like this in a Catholic church.
This Catholic unwillingness to welcome political speeches in the sanctuary can be explained by at least three main factors:
First, the dignity of the Mass itself. We feel that it would be, quite literally, a profanation if so secular a thing as partisan politics were allowed to intrude upon the most sacred of our sacred rites.
Second, we fear that our churches would lose their tax-exempt status if they allowed themselves to become theaters for partisan campaigning. (Why black Protestant churches don’t fear this is a puzzle.)
Third, the Catholic Church, during the last couple of centuries, has paid a heavy price for too close an alliance between itself and some class-based political parties in countries like France, Spain, and Mexico. This painful experience has taught us a lesson.
But how far can the leadership of the Church go in abstaining from partisan politics? Suppose that a hypothetical anti-Catholic political party announced that it would make it an offense, a civil offense and perhaps a criminal offense, for a bishop to refuse to ordain to the priesthood women or homosexuals, trans men or trans women, or married men.
Or suppose this hypothetical party announced that it would make it a “hate crime” for priests to speak of homosexual conduct as a sin; or that it would make it a crime for a religious organization to discriminate against transgenders or proud and practicing homosexuals in hiring or promotion.
Or suppose the party made it clear that it would fire Catholic public-school teachers who expressed, even outside of school (e.g., on Facebook), their opinion that acts of homosexuality are sinful and unnatural; or that transgenderism is an absurdity.
I could multiply imaginary situations, but I think you get the idea. Will our clerical leaders remain a-political until the hypothetical party begins shooting priests and nuns?…
The above comes from a March 4 story on The Catholic Thing.
Does anyone pay attention these days to what the clearly aged Hillary says, much less where she says it?
How many times must she humiliate herself until she accepts that the American people won’t elect her to any office? Why? I agree with the New York Times columnist who, in the 1980s, called he a “pathological liar”.
Bill Clinton, her “husband-of opportunity”, accomplished meaningful things: all the while admitting by a wink-and-a-nod that he was at heart a con man. I think that most Americans including me still regard him fondly for his under the radar transparency. It won over George H. W. Bush (whom he defeated in 1976) and Barbara Bush (as tough as they come). They virtually adopted him as a son. With Bill, there’s something real there. With Hillary, the only real thing is her ego.
The best advice this “husband-of-opportunity” can give to Hillary, this “wife-of-convenience”, is: face the fact that you are unlikeable and unbelievable; just sit back and enjoy the multimillions you extorted for the Clinton Foundation while you held high Federal offices; keep a low profile because (so far, at least) you’ve avoided a prison cell.
Does anyone pay attention these days to what the clearly aged Hillary says, much less where she says it?
How many times will she humiliate herself before she accepts that the American people won’t elect her to any office? And why is that? She’s a pathological liar, as a New York Times columnist wrote in the 1980s.
Consider Bill Clinton, her “husband-of opportunity”. He accomplished meaningful things: all the while admitting by a wink-and-a-nod that he was at heart a con man. I think that most Americans, including me, still regard him fondly for his under the radar transparency. It won over George H. W. Bush (whom he defeated in 1976) and Barbara Bush (an even tougher sell). They virtually adopted him as a son. With Bill, there’s something real there. With Hillary, the only reality is self-promotion.
The best advice this “husband-of-opportunity” can give to Hillary, this “wife-of-convenience”: face the fact that you are unlikeable and unbelievable; sit back and enjoy the multimillions you extorted for the Clinton Foundation while you held high Federal offices; keep a low profile—so far, at least, you’ve avoided jail.
“Why black Protestant churches don’t fear this is a puzzle.” No, it’s not. Who did the IRS go after during the Obama administration, to cripple their ability to exercise First Amendment rights by way of investigation and harassment? Hint: it wasn’t a Democrat organization. The activist pastors on the Left know this.
This article is based on pure speculation. By the way, the good pastor at the parish where I attend Mass frequently addresses political issues in his homilies. He told us, from the pulpit, who to vote for in the 2020 presidential election (Trump), he preached approvingly on Brexit, and he has also warned the congregation about the Covid19 vaccines. It is my understanding that priests get paid extra for funerals so perhaps that is why he was admonishing the parishioners about the vaccines.
So wouldn’t it be better then to believe in Xi?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/11/14/jesus-wont-save-you-president-xi-jinping-will-chinese-christians-told/
Dr. Carlin, a life-long Democrat and former office holder, asked, “Will our clerical leaders remain a-political until the hypothetical party begins shooting priests and nuns?”
And, the headline asks, “What will it take for bishops to speak out?”
In answer to the first question: hopefully not, but possibly so.
In answer to the second: when bishops begin to be shot, or at least imprisoned.
It’s apparent the genocidal mass killings of innocent babies haven’t moved them enough to stop giving Holy Communion to those who perpetrate such crimes against humanity.
I deeply and sincerely hope that I’m wrong and overly cynical.
i think this person does not keep up with the bishops or the Church very well.
They have been taking action on religious freedom issues for years.
Other issues, too.