Misleading numbers, misleading claims
by m
In a recent article Deal Hudson implies that 61 bishops have come forward to “clarify” what Faithful Citizenship means, implying or saying outright that a vote for Barack Obama is unacceptable. This statistic, and accompanying list of bishops, has been parroted around the Catholic barfosphere for days now. A simple click-though of Hudson’s list, though, shows that his numbers are simply, factually, wrong.
Hudson’s list is largely comprised of bishops who spoke out—rightly!—against the views expressed by Nanci Pelosi and Joe Biden in which they misrepresented Church teaching on abortion. If you actually click through to the statements cited by Hudson, it looks like less than 10 of them are statements which actually attempt to “clarify” or “interpret” Faithful Citizenship by binding Catholic consciences in favor of automatically disqualifying Obama as a potential choice.
Hudson’s list, and those who quote it, combines episcopal statements of various types, statements which serve different purposes and which have different messages. He, and his messengers, lump all of these statements together as if they are saying the same thing and to give the impression that a growing number of bishops are essentially forbidding a vote for Barack Obama when this could not be further from the truth. The number of bishops making this move remains, fortunately, very very low.
As a Catholic who definitely believes that, between the two of them, Barack Obama is the better choice, my pro-life commitments lead me to applaud the bishops on Hudson’s list who spoke out against the views of Pelosi and Biden which deliberately misrepresented the views of the Church. But I also applaud the fact that the number of bishops telling Catholics that they may not vote for Obama remains very small, contrary to Deal Hudson’s misleading presentation of the numbers. Indeed, I can count these bishops on one, maybe one and a half hands.
Comments
I received one such clarification. Here is my favorite quote: “And while ‘Faithful Citizenship’ acknowledges that one may vote for a politician who supports pro-abortion policies “only for truly grave moral reasons,” a conscientious voter must question what grave moral issue rises to the level of nearly 49 million lives lost to the evil of abortion.” I can’t stand the “yeah, but…” approach. I say poverty, war, and unchecked capitalism ranks up there.
first of all, thank you for your blog.
but i write this note primarily to recomend two books to you,
by john l. mckenzie, s.j. :
THE CIVILIZATION OF CHRISTIANITY,
and AUTHORITY IN THE CHURCH.
oldies but goldies . . .
Michael,
When you say that you applaud the bishops who spoke out against “the views of Pelosi and Biden which deliberately misrepresented the views of the Church”, how can you be so confident that these views were deliberately made? Faithful citizenship is a community responsibility, and not something delegated to public servants alone.
I am becoming increasingly concerned about the relative ignorance and vulnerability of our elected officials on moral and ethical issues, especially given the legislative power these relatively few individuals wield over our entire community. Are they really qualified to make prudential decisions on matters that affect our entire civilization? How can we ensure that they are sufficiently informed on grave matters of conscience? Do they have the advice and supportive criticism of their constituents, or just the influence of special interest groups, including Catholic bishops?
And while applauding certain bishops, let us not forget the dangers of creeping infallibility, when some individual episcopal authorities assume a kind of unassailable position of pontificating about political or even theological matters which are beyond their own expertise. Some of these recent episcopal statements smack of the horrors of the so-called “divine right of kings”. Lest we forget that power corrupts, I would be cautious about whom we applaud and why.
What is even more alarming is the escalating polarization within our North American society and the simplistic, cynical politicizing of certain ethical life issues in both the USA and Canada, particularly in the time of national election campaigns. At times this appears to be a kind of ongoing cultural civil war, but without the usual regional and geographical lines of demarcation. Some among us have even applauded the notion of culture wars.
What about the concept that Christianity is essentially a movement which is counter-culture? Or that we are called as a people to be a light to the nations, salt of the earth, leaven in the transformation of our society. This is call to the entire community, not just our anointed pastors. They too are called to be servants.
While some Catholics expect our bishops to take a public stand and issue statements on specific contentious moral abuses such as torture, capital punishment and war, there is never any public doubt about the Catholic position on abortion. We need to appreciate the consistent ethic of life, the concept of the seamless garment. And that means that each of us is acting responsibly every day toward life, and not simply expecting our anointed or elected leaders to do it for us, on our behalf.
Sensus fidelium.
From where I sit in Northeast Kansas at least two of the Kansas bishops and two of the Missouri bishops (Key battleground state!) have come out clearly for McCain as has the Bishop (?) in Lincoln, Nebraska. And so have Chaput in Denver and Martino in Scranton to name two in the national news of late. I would guess it is closer to 50 or 60 than just a few endorsing McCain.
What is funny about the whole thing is even though Obama expressly allows Roe-V-Wade McCain makes exceptions along with his Bushy foreign policy. Catholics STOP I REPEAT STOP thinking voting pro-life only means baby’s…your Church has also condemned the war in IRAQ and McCain makes exception for both of the two. Dead babies, dead soldiers dead civilians.
“i grow weary of this motif . . . ”
Please watch this video Mike.
http://www.ObamaMustSee.com
Hi david,
Thanks for sharing the video. It’s important that we who oppose abortion continue to keep these images in front of the faces of abortion rights advocates so they can see the reality of abortion. My wife and I had a baby two weeks ago and so the images are even more shocking in light of my recent experience of the miracle of life.
The problem, of course, is that we know by now that the republican party has done and will do nothing to defend the unborn and the rest of their policies are decidedly anti-life in the deepest sense. I was duped for many years by the rhetoric of the republican party and of Catholic republicans. Been there, done that. I won’t be duped again into thinking they have the answers or that they even give a shit. They say they hate abortion, but refuse to see how their very philosophy contributes to abortion’s causes. If they will not attack the causes, their pontificating is meaningless and will only serve as an issue to exploit every four years to fool well-meaning folks like yourself. The best way to end abortion is to change our society, and in the mean time, to do what the fellow in your video did: change hearts one at a time.
I am no democrat either. I reject them both. And depending on the election, I could see myself sitting out of the process. This time, though, I am voting primarily for those around the world who were on the receiving end of the republican party’s bombing raids. I am voting to help do my part to send the all-white american presidential tradition to hell. And I am voting for my daughter and my new nephew because, despite my cynicism, they deserve a better world. And every little bit helps. Even my stupid little ballot.
Thank you for your sincere response. I posted this in the comments at Vox Nova and they deleted it, though I’ve been a commenter there since the beginning, on occasion even offering something insightful. Dicks.
Well, I may very well have been the “dick” who deleted your post there. Not sure. Depending on the context, it may not have been an appropriate comment. Here, I think it would be better to reply to your legitimate concerns.