From the remarks last month of Rev. Charles Chaput, Archbishop of Philadelphia, to the "Cardinal O'Connor Conference on Life":

images

Catholics need to wake up from the illusion that the America we now live in – not the America of our nostalgia or imagination or best ideals, but the real America we live in here and now – is somehow friendly to our faith.  What we’re watching emerge in this country is a new kind of paganism, an atheism with air-conditioning and digital TV.  And it is neither tolerant nor morally neutral.

As the historian Gertrude Himmelfarb observed more than a decade ago, “What was once stigmatized as deviant behavior is now tolerated and even sanctioned; what was once regarded as abnormal has been normalized.”  But even more importantly, she added, “As deviancy is normalized, so what was once normal becomes deviant.  The kind of family that has been regarded for centuries as natural and moral – the ‘bourgeois’ family as it is invidiously called – is now seen as pathological...."

The task you need to take home with you today is this.  Never give up the struggle that the March for Life embodies.  No matter how long it takes; no matter how many times you march – it matters, eternally.  Because of you, some young woman will choose life, and that new life will have the love of God forever.....

Changing the course of American culture seems like such a huge task; so far beyond the reach of this gathering today.  But St. Paul felt exactly the same way.  Redeeming and converting a civilization has already been done once.  It can be done again.

Comments:


Mel Foil
Joined
Jun '10
etoiledunord

His executive summary (sort of) within the same speech:

Evil talks about tolerance only when it’s weak.  When it gains the upper hand, its vanity always requires the destruction of the good and the innocent, because the example of good and innocent lives is an ongoing witness against it.  So it always has been.  So it always will be.  And America has no special immunity to becoming an enemy of its own founding beliefs about human freedom, human dignity, the limited power of the state, and the sovereignty of God.

Very true. Evil doesn't sleep. When it's weak, it's just laying low and waiting.

Paul Cuenin
Joined
Dec '11
Paul Cuenin

Well said indeed. I think every conservative pro-life person should keep this in mind.

Richard Stewart
Joined
May '10
Richard Stewart

So much truth in what the archbishop said. And only the Gospel, preached by blessed Apostle Paul, "that Christ died for our sins... he was buried... he was raised on the third day" (1 Cor. 15.3-4) can change our culture, when individual people are changed by Jesus himself.My family and I pray for our country.


Joined
Jan '12
Noesis Noeseos
Richard Stewart: So much truth in what the archbishop said. And only the Gospel, preached by blessed Apostle Paul, "that Christ died for our sins... he was buried... he was raised on the third day" (1 Cor. 15.3-4) can change our culture, when individual people are changed by Jesus himself.My family and I pray for our country. · 1 minute ago

Do you have any idea of how offensive this claim is to believing Jews?

I'd like to hear your response, fellow, lest I come to believe that Torquemada is your best friend.

Edited on February 25, 2012 at 7:28pm
KC Mulville
Joined
Jan '11
KC Mulville

Rob Long asked during this week's podcast: pro-lifers point to polls and say that the people are on our side. If so, why hasn't anything been done? Rob argues that we need to persuade more people. 

I disagree. That's the damage of Roe v. Wade

Roe (and decisions that followed) blocked laws against abortion. We could have persuaded 99% of the people and it wouldn't change things. The problem here is a Supreme Court interpretation that doesn't care about the will of the people.  

Consider gay marriage. The people of California were persuaded. But their expressed will has been effectively overturned, because one gay judge exploited the imprecision of the Fourteenth Amendment, and then simply asserted that laws against gay marriage were just bigoted. 

Then we see a truly vicious circle. The pattern has been repeated a few times now ...

  1. Supreme Court allows something on the grounds of privacy and equal protection.
  2. The people believe that it must be OK because it's legal.
  3. The Court then refuses to overturn it on the grounds that the practice has become part of the "fabric" of American life. Stare decisis.

It's an immoral Catch-22.

tabula rasa
Joined
Jun '10
tabula rasa

Noesis Noeseos

Richard Stewart: So much truth in what the archbishop said. And only the Gospel, preached by blessed Apostle Paul, "that Christ died for our sins... he was buried... he was raised on the third day" (1 Cor. 15.3-4) can change our culture, when individual people are changed by Jesus himself.My family and I pray for our country. · 1 minute ago

Do you have any idea of how offensive this claim is to believing Jews? · 10 minutes ago

I doubt Richard intended to offend other people of faith.  The Lord we pray to can use all the prayers we (Christians and Jews, and others) can send his way.


Joined
Jan '12
Noesis Noeseos

tabula rasa

Noesis Noeseos

Richard Stewart: So much truth in what the archbishop said. And only the Gospel, preached by blessed Apostle Paul, "that Christ died for our sins... he was buried... he was raised on the third day" (1 Cor. 15.3-4) can change our culture, when individual people are changed by Jesus himself.My family and I pray for our country. · 1 minute ago

Do you have any idea of how offensive this claim is to believing Jews? · 10 minutes ago

I doubt Richard intended to offend other people of faith.  The Lord we pray to can use all the prayers we (Christians and Jews, and others) can send his way. · 1 minute ago

Thank you, tabula rasa, you are a good man.  But are you sure, really sure, that Richard is as charitable with his profession of faith as you are with yours?

Stephen Bishop
Joined
Jan '12
Stephen Bishop

Noesis Noeseos

Richard Stewart: So much truth in what the archbishop said. And only the Gospel, preached by blessed Apostle Paul, "that Christ died for our sins... he was buried... he was raised on the third day" (1 Cor. 15.3-4) can change our culture, when individual people are changed by Jesus himself.My family and I pray for our country. · 1 minute ago

Do you have any idea of how offensive this claim is to believing Jews? · 10 minutes ago

Why is it offensive?


Joined
Jan '12
Noesis Noeseos

Stephen Bishop

Noesis Noeseos

Richard Stewart: So much truth in what the archbishop said. And only the Gospel, preached by blessed Apostle Paul, "that Christ died for our sins... he was buried... he was raised on the third day" (1 Cor. 15.3-4) can change our culture, when individual people are changed by Jesus himself.My family and I pray for our country. · 1 minute ago

Do you have any idea of how offensive this claim is to believing Jews? · 10 minutes ago

Why is it offensive? · 2 minutes ago

If you have to ask that, there is simply no way I can satisfy you.  I still don't know about Richard, but you I can see becoming very cozy with Torquemada.   Or in your case, flubbing around with Cardinal Woolsey.

No, no, the Jews were expelled in Edward III's reign, weren't they?

Edited on February 25, 2012 at 7:42pm
Paul A. Rahe

I hope that Archbishop Chaput's episcopal colleagues are listening to and thinking about what he said. The reason that Roe v. Wade was not swiftly reversed is that their predecessors, under the leadership of Archbishop Bernardin, soft-pedaled the issue with an eye to sustaining their alliance with the Democratic Party on political issues outside their proper sphere..

It is no accident that, among our elected politicians, the fiercest supporters of the HHS mandate are professed Catholics. The near silence of the prelates in the face of an open, public rejection of the teaching of the Church on the subject of abortion by politicians professing to be Catholics is one of the great scandals of our time. We need more men of the calibre of Charles Chaput. Long may he live.


Joined
Jan '12
Noesis Noeseos

Paul A. Rahe: I hope that Archbishop Chaput's episcopal colleagues are listening to and thinking about what he said. The reason thatRoe v. Wade was not swiftly reversed is that their predecessors, under the leadership of Archbishop Bernardin, soft-pedaled the issue with an eye to sustaining their alliance with the Democratic Party on political issues outside their proper sphere..

It is no accident that, among our elected politicians, the fiercest supporters of the HHS mandate are professed Catholics. The near silence of the prelates in the face of an open, public rejection of the teaching of the Church on the subject of abortion by politicians professing to be Catholics is one of the great scandals of our time. We need more men of the calibre of Charles Chaput. Long may he live. · 1 minute ago

Professor Rahe, I respect you mightily, but I do not envy at all how you must have to accommodate some of the burdens that fideism and dogma must place upon the intellect.  There is sublimity indeed in the speculations of Thomas Aquinas, but even his had to defer to authority for authority's sake.  Most regrettable.

Peter Robinson
Paul A. Rahe: The near silence of the prelates in the face of an open, public rejection of the teaching of the Church on the subject of abortion by politicians professing to be Catholics is one of the great scandals of our time. We need more men of the calibre of Charles Chaput. Long may he live. · 5 minutes ago

I couldn't agree more, Paul.  I just couldn't agree more.

Gil Bailie
Joined
Oct '11
Gil Bailie

Thanks, Peter, for calling attention to the archbishop's strong statement. I had missed it. Clearly, it needs to be widely read and discussed. 

katievs
Joined
May '10
katievs

Peter Robinson: 

“As deviancy is normalized, so what was once normal becomes deviant.  The kind of family that has been regarded for centuries as natural and moral – the ‘bourgeois’ family as it is invidiously called – is now seen as pathological...."

This is what I have been noting in the hysterical commentary (including on Ricochet) surrounding Rick Santorum and his "extreme" views.  He is being treated as flatly "unacceptable" (Jennifer Rubin's term), not because of his policy proposals, but because of his views.  He and the millions who share those views (self among them) are being told we are beyond the American pale.  We need not run for office; we may not count on our fundamental rights being protected.  We will be maligned, mocked, sneered at and marginalized in the public square.

This is America?


Joined
Jan '12
Noesis Noeseos

katievs

This is what I have been noting in the ... commentary surrounding Rick Santorum and his "extreme" views.  He is being treated as flatly "unacceptable" (Jennifer Rubin's term), not because of his policy proposals, but because of hisviews.  He and the millions who share those views (self among them) are being told we are beyond the American pale.  We need not run for office; we may not count on our fundamental rights being protected.  We will be maligned, mocked, sneered at and marginalized in the public square.

This is America? · 2 minutes ago

I see what you are saying, that Sanotrum's views are being maligned.  Certainly the legacy press, which is in the hands of the social liberals, has played its part. 

But again I'd like to offer for reflection a tactical concern, a matter of style and timing and emphasis.  Just now, when the Republicans could prevail so easily as long as the public discourse focused on economics and foreign policy, just now may not be the best time to draw the focus to arenas in which the populace is still so severely divided.  The time for education may better come a little later.

Edited on February 25, 2012 at 8:29pm
K T Cat
Joined
Sep '10
K T Cat

Awesome find!  Thanks so much for posting this.

katievs
Joined
May '10
katievs

Noesis Noeseos

I see what you are saying, that Sanotrum'sviewsare being maligned...

But again I'd like to offer for reflection a tactical concern, a matter ofstyleand timing andemphasis...

What concerns me is the left is is clearly trying to establish not just in our psyches, but in law, through the HHS mandate, that the Catholic position on contraception is unacceptable.  It will not be respected; it will not tolerated.  

This is a moment when every single conservative (and every remaining liberal who cares about the First Amendment) should be loudly and adamantly standing with Catholics.

We should not be falling in with the left's strategy of making opposition to birth control seem so outlandish that it can't be respected in the public square. 

We shouldn't be worried about style when so much vital substance is at stake.

I don't care whether you support Rick Santorum for president.  You should be decrying the de facto "religious test" being imposed on him by the left.


Joined
Jan '12
Noesis Noeseos

@katievs

On the specific issue of the First Amendment and how its protections for Catholics regarding the mandate for providing contraceptives is being violated, I agree with you 100%.  Here style matches substance, and no honest division exists amongst the populace. The battle is upon us and can be won NOW with a decisive commitment.

We can easily form alliances, even with (I suspect) liberals of the Joe Lieberman or Nat Hentoff temperament.  I'll leave aside for the moment just how Santorum might factor into all of this--my man Newt will offer homilies from the same text--but I am with you.  It's time to Go For Broke!

KC Mulville
Joined
Jan '11
KC Mulville

Noesis Noeseos

Just now, when the Republicans could prevail so easily as long as the public discourse focused on economics and foreign policy, just now may not be the best time to draw the focus to arenas in which the populace is still so severely divided. 

No.

What prompted this contraception debate? Was it that the conservatives decided, out of the blue, to start opening social-issue cans of worms? No.

  1. The Obama Administration changed the HHS policy to mandate free contraceptives, and conservatives objected. 
  2. The media presented open-ended questions about contraception to the GOP candidates.
  3. To their credit, for the most part, the candidates correctly dismissed the generalities and tried to refocus the issue on religious liberty.
  4. But the media ignored that, and simply reported that contraception was "the news story of the day" and asked America if the GOP's extreme views were acceptable.

Now, having completely lost the issue in the fog ... amazingly ... the GOP candidates are being blamed for bringing up contraception. People are wondering why they felt the need to bring it up now.

They didn't.

Paul A. Rahe

Noesis Noeseos

Paul A. Rahe:

Professor Rahe, I respect you mightily, but I do not envy at all how you must have to accommodate some of the burdens that fideism and dogma must place upon the intellect.  There is sublimity indeed in the speculations of Thomas Aquinas, but even his had to defer to authority for authority's sake.  Most regrettable. · 1 hour ago

I am not the best of Catholics. I sometimes waver in my belief. I do not regard myself as an exemplar. I admire greatly men like Archbishop Chaput, who is an exemplar.


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading

Start your shopping here!

Help support Ricochet by making your purchases through our Amazon links.

Welcome Visitor!
Join  or  Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Ricochet: The Right People, The Right Tone, The Right Place.  Join today!

Already a Member? Sign In