Archbishop Burke began this well and I decided to wade in and read the whole thing. I read it all, some portions a few times.

I wrote a long response, submitted it, and discovered it was overlong and I lost all I had written. (thank you Lord, for that awesome moment to practice patience!) My guess is it is a blessing to those who may have decided to read it.

I will try to be more brief in this attempt.


I know that what we have here is an opus that outlines well the Church's teaching in a way that is certainly of great use. I am convinced that there is an Eternal Law, that Natural Law exists, that our civil and canon laws are expressions of these, and that we do need reminding from time to time. This piece is extremely well done.

I thought too, though, that I heard early in his teaching that the Archbishop wanted to reach out to a divided Catholic populace in this country. I was hopeful in this respect. Espeically as he described the political divides that appear to be growing among us as Catholics. I appreciated much, almost all, of what he wrote. I was looking forward to reading something new, or at least showing some awareness of where it is I seem to be coming from.

I have to say much of what is here is good. There were new things, applications of new teachings that I will incorporate in my own teaching. I loved the inclusion of Benedict's latest encyclicals reminding us of the place reason has in purifying religion and that reason is purified by faith. It is sweet truth. This is a good, solid piece of writing, and will be good for instruction in many ways. Still, I was wanting more.

You see, I was somewhat soured because I did not feel that I was reached. The archbishop seemed to set out by discussing context, the current political climate as it exists, but somehow failed to understand the nature of those who see things differently than he does. There are many groups of Catholics out there. This treatise will be hailed by many pro-life Catholics as a perfect polemic to use against those with whom they most vociferously disagree. Some will be absolutely apoplecitc at the apologetic. (sorry, I couldn't resist )

But me, and my guess is, many who see things a bit more fuzzy than I do...well...it still doesnt seem to hit home solidly.

You see, I feel as though the two groups are talking past each other. Progressive Catholics, for wont of a better term, are not faithless, mindless, partisans who can only forgive and never see truth. We are not pro-abortion, non thinking, nominal cafeteria catholics who have no idea what forming our consciences is about.

There has got to be a way for us to connect.

The fact that Archbishop Burke spoke about scandal after discussing current context and failed to at least acknowledge again the huge sex scandals of the last six or so decades in our Church leaves me a bit empty. How when discussing scandal, can you talk about the "irony" of political correctness and the scandalized being treated as though they are uncharitable? I mean, shouldn't there be a little humility as we discuss scandal? To not even acknowledge the recent sex scandals while trying to bridge a division among Catholics in a piece that started out by trying to include context seems ironic as well.

Please know that I fully understand that the truth of what is laid out in the above work by Archbishop Burke is in NO WAY diminshed because of the sex scandals. Still, there are many, many more good works that need to be done to repair this great evil that has transpired. I fear that moral absolutism without contextual humility may not serve the Church, or reach the audience that Archbishop Burke most desires to reach.

There are thousands of uncatechised Catholics out there who have little or no literacy in theology. They do not understand the words ecclesiology, or soteriolgy, much less have need for the terms we so easily toss about here on this site. But, those of us who do understand them, even have a passing mastery of them, some of us still feel looked down upon, even excoriated for actually following our consciences in this past election by voting for Obama.

Archbishop Burke did not reference the USCCB Faithful Citizenship document in his words, either. This document came from all of our bishops and stated quite a bit what I in my conscience had already come to understand. That "There may be times when a Catholic who rejects a candidate’s unacceptable position may decide to vote for that candidate for other morally grave reasons." That despite the fact that I know I am pro-life, I still have a well formed, well prayed and well loved conscience that I followed this past November.

Consistently I am told, though, by a certain type of Catholic, that I must have a malformed, or misinformed conscience. You know what? I am open to this possibility. I might have been wrong. I admit that freely.

What I find odd, though, and quite common, is that many on the other side do not countenance this possibility much at all with respect to their own decision.

All the arguing and exposition against seamless garments, and moral proportionalism can go on and on and on. In the end, each of us has to follow our conscience, regardless if it is malformed or not.

I just wish there were more voices strong enough to ask those who seem self righteous, to lay off a bit, for the sake of peace and the possiblity of real communication.

I will contiue to post as best I can.

Peace to all who took the time to read this. Pray for me, as I will you.

in person and was amazed, when I heard the truth spoken with such charity, how clearly it resonated within me. I am happy now to have the text of his remarks to share with others (in particular, one of our diocesan priests to whom I recommended Burke's remarks). Archbishop Burke's catechsis on the faith are well worth further study with the end in mind of further helping to form my conscience in harmony with the teachings of the Church.

Thank you, Archbishop Burke! Rarely do I see the Church's position put forth with such clarity and CALMNESS! It gives me hope! And, to Rich: God Bless and keep praying. You have the courage to listen and to struggle with the issues. Keep at it! Keep informing your conscience! We are all on a different path, but, hopefully, seeking the same God. From personal experience, I KNOW it becomes clearer!

One more point on the seamless garment. It is an attractive idea, and I agree, it has been misused. Rather than a seamless garment, I believe we must speak of a hierarchy of values and priorities.

In Caritas in Veritate, Pope Benedict wrote of the relationship between abortion and the problem of poverty:

"While the poor of the world continue knocking on the doors of the rich, the world of affluence runs the risk of no longer hearing those knocks, on account of a conscience that can no longer distinguish what is human."

In other words, our ability to address the needs of the poor is severely compromised by our inability to acknowledge the humanity of the unborn child or the old or sick person, or anyone else marked for death by the Culture of Death.

Archbishop Burke is a great man who walks the walk and not wishy washy, you know just what he means when he says it. I saw him so upset with the other Bishops at the USCCB where they refused to vote together not to allow our Lord to be given to those politicians who promote the death of the unborn, like the Pelosi's, Kerry's and Kennedy's. I think any Catholic who voted for Obama this last election should be ashamed of themselves and committed a mortal sin

Would a jew vote for a politician who is opposed to the Jewish state of Israel or their wellbeing? Not a chance. Catholics 50 years ago had to be taken serious by the Politicians as we used to before the liberalization of the church and the Catholic reformation of the 1960's as we like to call it, voted as a block. Now you have 57% of Catholics voting for a man who is a borderline socialist and promotes the death of the unborn. So many Catholics had such a hatred for President Bush who kept us safe for 8 years and saved how many millions of fetus from being laboratory experiments. So now you have Obama allowing unfettered access to the destruction of the unborn

Thank you Archbishop for speaking your mind, please do not get discouraged

Archbishop Burke's piece is a reminder of why we are blessed beyond measure to live in a democracy and not a theocracy.

Long live separation of church and state!

"The administration of our federal government openly and aggressively follows a secularist agenda. While it may employ religious language and even invoke the name of God, in fact, it proposes programs and policies for our people without respect for God and His Law."

The archbishop IS referring to the Bush administration here, right?

Often times in life there is a difference between what is happening on the surface and what is "really" going on.

Archbishop Burke seems to be trying to articulate the "orthodox" view of being a Catholic, in the world. But what really is going on seems more to be an attempt to get Catholics to view the world through the prism of Americanism (pursuit of life, liberty and happiness). Let me explain.

Christian Humanism calls for us to "put on Christ" -- to take on the form of Christ. Only then are we "real" men and women. If we persevere in the struggle to participate in "being," to be real, to be holy, whatever you want to call it, we will see with Our Lord's eyes and love with Our Lord's heart.

John Paul II is an example of a real man who saw with Our Lord's eyes and loved with Our Lord's heart. As such, he gave things their "proper weight." He didn't try to fit God's plans into "man's" plans (like the neo-cons), but rather worked to reconcile all things with God. So should we.

Thank you, Bishop Burke! Thank you, InsideCatholic!
Reading this talk is such a relief. The Bishop articulates the teaching of the universal Church in an understandable but learned style. Our local bishop is a "one issue among many" advocate so, as you can see, the whole business is very confusing. That's why its so helpful to have sound teaching from someone at Burke's level.

A woman went to Padre Pio once long ago and told him she had had an abortion; he told her that the child she had conceived would have been a Pope...whether one believes this or not there can be no doubt that among the over 50 million human babies exterminated in the womb, and among the many, many more millions of human lives those babies would have generated, there were surely among them those who would have cured diseases, found solutions for world hunger and poverty, inventors, and artists and musicians and writers, mothers and father...explorers and missionaries, teachers, firefighters, policemen and women, relief workers, mothers and fathers and siblings...research scientists...health care people...and so many, many more...yet, we have rejected these human beings, broken them, and sent them back to their Creator unwanted, while we continue to look around at a world devastated by poverty and disease, ravished by war ... fearful of a nuclear holocaust...those rejected human babies could have been the peacemakers, the healers...so much loss!!!

The sarcasm is misplaced.

Perhaps you intuit that this Democrat administration has made a series of proposals that are very bad indeed? I hope you will explore this intuition until you find that it is correct.

The bishop used plain words and clear syntax so it will be hard to evade the simple truth he speaks.

I think the problem lies in the contradictions and teachings of the church which for the first 1960 years or so declared she was the one true church and only through her can one be saved.

Pope Pius X solemnly declared:
" The City cannot be built otherwise than God has built it. Society cannot be set up unless the Church lays the foundations and supervises the work."

Then with Vatican II, which the Archbishop quotes, you have Dignitas Humanae, which states:

"This Vatican council declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom.... This council further declares that the right to religious freedom is based on the very dignity of the human person, as known through the revealed word of God and by reason itself."(4)


How can that be? Through the revealed word of God? Through "Reason" itself? That sounds like Voltaire and the French Revolution where in France in 1789 the church land was confiscated and Thousands of clergy were beheaded, but we were all taught in school growing up how great was the French Revolution. Why was that?

So the church has splintered and Archbishop Burke and others like myself believe that one must follow the magesterium and the teachings as they were always infallibly taught and not modernised to suit those who want to decide and pick what they want to believe and follow

Rich--You illustrate the archbishop's point about proportionalism. He is addressing the fact that in a representative democracy that is heavily populated with people who claim to be Christians, there is an ongoing holocaust like no other in the history of mankind! Such a discussion has no place for the consideration of other issues, scandals. Besides, he's probably so disgusted with the US bishops that he doesn't even want to go there...
We are blessed to have Archbishop Burke's clear articulation. Let's be thankful!
Loretta

I read you differently than you read yourself. I think you are getting somewhere. Consider:

“You see, I was somewhat soured because I did not feel that I was reached.”
I think you were reached, and that the bishop’s message was delivered right on the button. The knockout victim is sure to learn something important.

“There are thousands of uncatechised Catholics out there who have little or no literacy in theology. … some of us still feel looked down upon, even excoriated for actually following our consciences in this past election by voting for Obama.”

First, I am sure the number ranges into tens of millions who have only a thin understanding of their faith. And that millions would like the truth to be other than what it is. So millions squirm about, trying to resolve their many disorders and resulting discomforts.

Second, no well-catechized Catholic is looking down on you; that is a projection. I suspect you feel some combination of shame, embarrassment, and regret, as I would feel if I had voted for Obama.

So third, we have perhaps a conscience that knows it misfired, would like the truth to be what they want it to be, and will continue to bother the owner until he confronts and repairs his disorders.

What to do? Receive the sacraments, read, pray, talk, listen, practice discernment, and follow any discipline that helps to develop a fully Catholic conscience. We need every single one; we don’t want to lose even one.

So those who turn toward the true deposit of faith are welcome. Nobody has reason to look down on you even though millions of Catholic Americans knew that Mr. Obama would be a disaster. We (I am one such) will not ostracize you. We will welcome you and, I suspect, give you the red carpet treatment. You have only to step on up.

So I encourage you to keep going on this track; you show signs that rapid movement to the light is possible. We need every single one.

As for the bishop, that old man knows a few things, doesn’t he?

Francis:

Sorry to disagree: "Archbishop Burke is a great man who walks the walk and not wishy washy, you know just what he means when he says it. I saw him so upset with the other Bishops at the USCCB where they refused to vote together not to allow our Lord to be given to those politicians who promote the death of the unborn, like the Pelosi's, Kerry's and Kennedy's"

Burke is a Prefect (Cabinet Minister) in the Vatican. Well, NOT A SINGLE USCCB bishop has been summoned to Rome, for not giving notice to "Catholic" pro-abortion lawmakers, as a step for excommunication. Not to mention that the Kennedy burial with two cardinals exalting HIS LEGACY! IS a long announces horrendos SCANDAL recognized by Burke. If he is to walk the walk with those scandal maker bishops, please stop that talk and walk them to refresh their meditations in some Vatican cells.

Thank you, Archbishop Burke. Everything you wrote here is what I believe, think and feel but do not possess the eloquence to put into words. I am forwarding this to as many people as possible including my "Catholic" senator, Dickie Durbin.

Manuel

You have a point, but lets not thrown the baby out with the bathwater, Archbishop Burke at least is one of the good ones. But he will never rise to a seat of power, instead Cardinal George and even Bishop Murphy (who along with Cardinal Law protected countless pedophile priests) get promoted. If we have a priesthood that is suspected of being anywhere from 30% to 50% homosexual, anyone who speaks out against the pedophiles to openly will be blackballed as the Archbishop has been as he is conservative

I think one has to just go back to the moto proprio of Pope Paul VI of September 1965 called Apostolica Sollicitudo where the establishment of the Synod of Bishops was created. This was a huge disaster. It made the Pope a figurehead

When I read the encyclicals of Pope Pius X, Leo XIII and so on, it is crystal clear where they stand on a subject. The encyclicals after Humane Vitae have all been about love and ecumenism instead of dealing directly with the threats inside the church and outside, and why she was established by Christ, for the salvation of souls.

How many times can one find the word "dignity" in the Second Vatican Council, and encyclicals thereafter, just take a look at the USCCB website and the topics they address, and of course dignity is thrown all over there as well

http://www.usccb.org/

Rich referred to the "sex scandal." All Catholics have a duty to read "A Report on the Crisis of the Catholic Church in the United States" by The National Review Board for the Protection of Children and Young People (Feb 27, 2004), in particular, p. 80-81:

"However, we must call attention to the homosexual behavior that characterized the vast majority of the cases of abuse observed in recent decades. That eighty-one of the reported victims of sexual abuse by Catholic clergy were boys shows that the crisis was characterized by homosexual behavior....
It has been reported to the Board that, in some areas, the large number of homosexual priests or candidates had the effect of discouraging heterosexual men from seeking to enter the priesthood. In the 1970's and 1980's in particular, there developed at certain seminaries a "gay subculture," and at these seminaries, according to several witnesses, homosexual liaisons occurred among students, or between students and teachers. Such subcultures existed or exist in certain dioceses or orders as well. The board believes that the failure to take disciplinary action against such conduct contributed to an atmosphere in which sexual abuse of adolescent boys by priests was more likely."

Bishops like Cardinal Mahony have been trying to cover this up. These were abetted by those like Cardinal McCarrick, who set up his 'child protection' program in the diocese of Washington, DC to undermine the conclusion of the National Review Board, and cunningly reversed the focus toward abuse by 'married heterosexual men.'

We should worry about bishops like Mahony and McCarrick, and thank God for those like Archbishop Burke, and pray for all of them, the bad and the good.

I wish the Bishops would honor Our Lady of America's request by processing her statue into the Washington Basilica and dedicate the youth of the United States to her purity.
WE NEED SUPERNATURAL HELP and the GRACES SUCH AN ACT WOULD BRING US.

Rich points to the inability of many to grasp the ideas of the Archbishops message for both educational and moral/cultural reasons (if I grasp his meaning).

I, as a sort of lay evangelist, feel better equipped to speak to college students in a language they understand as I use these truths as a launching point. I can now add the necessary illustrations that give young people the needed reference points to put the pieces together.

This is precisely the job of our prelates. To equip us to reach the world, not with pep talks and feel-good messages, but with the sure moral and intellectual footing needed to stand firm while messages carefully crafted to elicit compassion and outrage - but at their core are messages of death and destruction - are delivered in rapid succession to a naive and susceptible world.

Thank you Holy Spirit for giving us such men!

Rich:

Polls show that many Independants who voted for President Obama are feeling "buyer's remorse," and it is not surprising that some Catholics, regardless of party affiliation, are beginning to feel the same.

I think Catholics who voted for Obama have to examine the reasoning that went into their vote so that we do not have this acrimony in 2012.

It appears to me that many Catholics voted for Obama because they hated George Bush due to the War in Iraq. Putting aside for a moment the fact that abortion and euthanasia are on a different level than the War, there are still two problems with voting for Obama on that basis.

First, Obama was not running against George Bush. Second, how could anyone believe the War was going to come to an end shortly after Obama took office? Seeking to punish a President who was leaving office by voting for someone with Obama's track record on Life Issues makes no sense to me.

When Archbishop Burke speaks of scandal he speaks only of scandal he does not agree with or wishes to highlight. The scandal of the Catholic Church and it state preference for the poor and then closing soup kitchens where there are great consentrations of poor is a scandal, the Catholic Church not paying a living wage when multiple Popes have supported the need for providing those who work with a dignified life is a scandal, I think about the past two Sunday's second readings, the sex abuse and then hiding it is a scandal. In that area I am reminded of this past Sunday's Gospel - perhaps reading it would help the good Archbishop.
If the Bishops, Archbishops and on up and down would like to examine how organizations continue to grow and remain relevant they should recall the last supper where Jesus taught us, especially the disciples to be servants first and not to impose themselves on people. We should review his words to the pharasees and look at who he came to be with. These words and perhaps remembering that Jesus came for those of us who needed Him and still do are sadly missing from the pronounements of various prelates.

If conservative and liberal Catholics took half the time they spend slagging on each other, and used it to feed the hungry, people in Darfur would have steak and caviar every day.

Mick:

It does not matter how much food you send to Darfur if the government seizes all of it and the people who need it can't have it.

The Church is also second to no institution in trying to help the poor around the world, so the theory that the conflict between American Catholics over the primacy of Life Issues is somehow impairing that effort is not supported by the facts.

For many of the faithful who conflate all issues related to life within one argument, which too often precludes concrete action connected to traditional Catholic teaching on any, the seamless garment of life approach has become the operating intellectual framework.

It has been demolished by many in the past, but its insidious effects linger within the minds and hearts of many of the not well-informed faithful, continuing the confusion around life issues—issues which are clearly hierarchical—with the protection of life of the most innocent and defenseless of all, the growing human being in the womb of the mother, occupying the primary place around which the faithful work to change the laws of our country.

And, though the seamless garment argument has been completely destroyed in the past, I have not read as powerful and cogent denunciation of its corrosive impact on life—virtually giving cover to the Culture of Death in America—as in this article by Archbishop Burke.

Or at least it isn't for me. The dear Archbishop writes:

"According to the proportionalist way of thinking, each of us has the right to choose what are the most important moral issues"

If that is so, then I would say proportionalism is no more than moral relativism- and the Seamless Garment of Life for a proportionalist becomes the rent bunch of rags.

I guess I got something else out of the Seamless Garment of Life- in fact, quite the opposite. For me- under this beautiful teaching I no longer have the "right to choose"- any moral argument that affects life, between conception and natural death, is equally strong to me, and I can no more vote for a "pro-choice" politician than I can vote for a "pro-preemptive strike" politician or a "pro-pollution" politician.

In other words, the very words of the proportionalist movement tie my conscience in such knots that only a Catholic politician in full communion with the Church can get my vote.

The Democrats are not. The Republicans, are not. America, in it's very Constitution, denies subsidarity in Article 1, Section 10, and denies solidarity in the First Amendment.

Far better not to exercise the right to vote, than to cooperate with evil and endanger one's immortal soul.

Thank you Archbishop Burke for the wonderful and thoughtful testament to our faith and how we should conduct ourselves in society.

I was kind of disappointed however, not by those who disagree with the Archbishop per se, but by the people who in the comments above state that the Archbishop has no right to talk about sin and scandal if the Church or any member within it has sinned or has been the cause of scandal.

Jesus Christ and the Blessed Virgin Mary were the only ones ever in the history of this planet to have been without sin. If we cannot call something sinful because we have sinned, then we fall into the trap of calling nothing sinful.

I understand that people are angry regarding clergy abuse, and we should stand up more to make OUR Church more accountable. We should not, however, refuse to hear about anything regarding sinfulness, just because some of our clergy have sinned.

My critic takes my exasperation too literally. To clarify:

There is a subset of Catholics exasperated and confused by the back and forth criticisms (and contradictions) between the two camps, particularly those from the bishops. If they can't be unified, how can we?

Secondly, the very public battles between the two camps take up a great deal of energy with very little result, IMO. Is anyone's mind changed by all this, or do we just have different bishops preaching to their own choirs? A good argument could be made that the very fabric of the Church is being shredded in the current fracas. All that angry energy could be channeled more constructively somehow.

Lastly, if either camp thinks the best outcome is a pure "conservative" or pure "liberal" church, then be careful what you pray for! I fear the victory would be a more than Pyrhhic one, with potential for schism and a great deal of residual rancor. And good luck with the Sunday collection when half your congregation decides to go somewhere else.

Mick:

I do not consider arguments, even heated ones, about what it means to be Catholic in this culture to be "bickering." These are important issues that have to be discussed.

With regard to the Sunday collection, I get the impression, and I think that polls before and after the election, as well as surveys taken during the Notre Dame controversy, support that impression, that Catholics who supported President Obama during those two events are less likely to be weekly Church-goers. Consequently, the impact might not be as great as you think.

Brian:

I think we focus on different things. Your concerns are (I'm guessing) more theological, while mine would be more practical or administrative. I'm asking what are the practical effects of the present debate? Is it changing people's minds or is it just stirring up rancor? Is it helpful to the laity for hierarchs to fight in public? Having worked in a number of disfunctional organizations (OK, enough about a career in biotechnology) open fighting among the higher ups never seemed to help morale or improve output in the rest of the firm. After all, a house divided against itself can not stand. Maybe you could tell me what you see the present controversy adds to improving the Church. What is your vision of what the Church should be? What will it take to get there? And what will the ultimate cost be to the Church?

Of course, easy for me to ask; books have been written on any one of these questions. I've gotta go get some work done. Have a good day. Ciao!

This is the Golden Rule taught to us by Our Lord Jesus through His Apostles in Mathew:16 And the eleven disciples went into Galilee, unto the mountain where Jesus had appointed them. 17 And seeing him they adored: but some doubted. 18 And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. 19 Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.


Our own Catholics, most who know little or nothing about our faith need to be evangelized first; before they can have “a profound knowledge of others and their beliefs, and the honest acknowledgment of differences of belief”. Dear Archbishop, your article is an excellent teaching tool for us Catholics. However your above statement seems to be contradictory in placing other religions equally with the Catholic Faith and acknowledging Catholicism to be one among many.


This leads us to deny the need to evangelize as Jesus taught in the above Gospel passage and is confusing for us Catholics. However, Archbishop you are right in saying: “It is, in fact, of the very nature of the Christian faith to love all men, without boundary or exception…Christian love does not have its foundation in blind tolerance of others and of what they think and say, especially in what may compromise the life of the nation.” True Ecumenism is to follow the above Gospel passage.


There are Catholics who through the great mercy of God believe in the Nicene Creed and try to daily live their faith following all the teachings handed down through the ages by the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.


Political correctness and in-fighting have no place in our Catholic Faith. Defenders of Christian marriage and family and the sanctity of life from conception to natural death are not extremists. We Catholics must also take care of life between birth and death and care for the mother and infant, the poor, sick and elderly and the dying. Pro-Lifers have been moved to speak up against the crime of the murder of innocent children created by God. We, the Catholic faithful are members of the Church militant here on earth. We have an obligation to stand up to defend all the teachings of the Catholic Church founded by Jesus Christ. We are also acutely aware that Truth and Charity cannot be separated.


Since you mention the Kennedy funeral, I do have a comment.


One does not need to be a theologian or a Doctor of Divinity to know when something is terribly wrong. As Catholics we are aware of our own sinfulness. We struggle daily with life’s choices in obedience to all the teachings of our Catholic faith. We fall many a time and keep getting up. The Holy Spirit infuses into our souls the grace received in Baptism, Confirmation and the graces received in the Holy Eucharist which grows as we strive to be holy. This grace sears into our hearts, minds and conscience what is truth and false. We then know in our bones, in the depths of our being what is intrinsically sinful and wrong and what is innately good and beautiful.


As always, this scandal was caused not by Ted Kennedy or his family but by the Bishop or bishops and priests who should have known better, yet permitted this man to have a fully televised, Catholic Requiem Mass in the Basilica of Our Lady of Perpetual Help. Bishops and priests do not own the sacraments to do as they please. They are the guardians, defenders and administrators of the Sacraments, especially the Holy Eucharist.


Ted Kennedy came from a very prominent so called Catholic Family whose many members have openly defied the teachings and laws of the Catholic Church through their actions such as divorce, infidelity, support of abortion, euthanasia and open rebellion to the magisterium of the Catholic Church. Under the pretext of civil liberties and protecting women’s rights, this man helped enact laws which have disastrous repercussions and continuity for years to come. Ted Kennedy facilitated and promoted killing of the innocent unborn among other things.
He was a prominent public sinner and as such his repentance should have been public.

Instead of writing to the Pope he should have written a note to be read at his funeral Mass (which is reported that he and his second wife planned together), where he admitted that he had sinned and what he did was morally and ethically sinful.


The sacrament of penance is between the sinner, the priest and God. God is merciful and welcomes the repentant sinner. I have no problem with Ted Kennedy having a private Requiem Mass. However, as a well informed Catholic myself, I know that for a valid confession, one has to admit that one’s sins were willfully committed with full knowledge that they were sinful and evil; that one detests them; and will with the grace of God give up and not repeat them. Contd.

Contd…

To all politicians who call themselves Roman Catholic, and to those who sing the praises of Ted Kennedy, remember, in the end Ted Kennedy had to admit that he was wrong; that he abhorred all that he stood for, advocated, promoted and enacted by using his earthly power to commit sins against God and man. He had to retract what he said and did so publicly against life itself acknowledging that they were wrong. What an example he could have been. An opportunity missed. He should have been looking at St. Thomas Moore the patron saint of politicians.


It is not too late for living politicians who call themselves Catholic and will want a public demonstration of pomp and splendour in a Catholic cathedral or basilica when the time comes. They should take a hard look at their own lifestyles, examples they set and Catholic morals, values and teachings of the Catholic Church. It’s not too late for them while they still have the gift of life which some of them have denied to others. One can deceive oneself and others but one cannot deceive GOD.


As for some cardinals, bishops and priests, I wonder if you even believe in the Church that Jesus founded or Jesus Himself. Many a time your actions, words and behaviour is scandalous. Your responsibility is very grave and you will have to answer to the Judge Who is not only merciful but also JUST. To whom much is given, much is required.

I certainly agree that it is better to have harmonious conditions in an organization of any size.

You are also right that I am approaching this from a theological point of view, but this dispute is a theological one. It goes to the essential question of what it means to be a Catholic.

From the very beginning of the Church, a clear distinction between the Christians and the pagans living around them was that the Christians rejected abortion and infanticide.

In the past presidential election, a majority of the people who identified themselves as Catholics voted for a man whose record on Life Issues is abysmal. Some justified that vote by reasoning that Senator Obama would do more for the poor, which, theoretically might result in fewer abortions. Others thought Obama would end the War in Iraq. The Notre Dame fiasco just fanned the flames created by the election.

I believe that if you look at B16's writings, both before and after he became Pope, it is clear that abortion and euthanasia are on a different level. A society that promotes, or even just tolerates, those evils is always going to fail in its efforts to alleviate material deprivation; such a society will have a malignancy at its core that will contaminate any good that society seeks to accomplish.

Good comments Celine. You should write for Inside Catholic.

Ted:
While it is possible to withdraw from active participation in the political life of our country, I would argue that intrinsic evil must be resisted with all peaceful means at our disposal. I do not know of the "pro-preemptive strike" or "pro-pollution" politicians you refer to. However, I cannot ignore those who in their appeals to potential voters support policies that would deny others the protections that have been afforded them, whether that protection was by free choice or constrained by law. The candidates opposing those polocies will always get my vote.
Were there consensus among all Catholics to oppose abortion with their vote for just one or two election cycles, we could end its legal sanction. Pleas consider that your possible vote could help to that end.
The perfect must not become the enemy of the good.

Not being a theologian by any means, I read he whole article by Archbishop Burke (except for a few words!)but understood clearly.
I wish to thank the Archbishop from the bottom of my heart.
Those who are deeply concerned about our secular world and by Catholic politicians who are ignoring the great immorality they supporting; when thy warn of the consequences of ignoring the true meaning of life, they will be in a difficult position and know they have to suffer and called disturbers and division makers.
About the Kennedy funeral what did it say to all the Kennedy's and to the Politicians? Just copy your uncle and your colleague, no harm was done?
May God be with us.
Marie Jalsevac

Thank you, Archbishop, for speaking the truth.

Perhaps we can now turn to the non-stop scandal of the Catholic Campaign for Human Development?

I found this to be a very well written and clear teaching from whast I feel to be one of our best shepherds, thank you Archbishop Burke for your willingness to publically provide instruction (and be willing to bear the criticisms that inevitably in today's culture come along with it.)

Guess one can say "salt and light make you blind / Light and Salt make you bold". If only such articles and voices got more spreading via the media.

Archbishop Burke's address lays solid groundwork for an episcopal statement describing the kinds of legislative actions which would cause a Catholic politician to be excommunicated.

Saint Jerome, pray for us!

FINALLY, the pro-life movement has a very senior prelate in the RC Church willing to at least defend the critics of the quislings within the Church that make the wholly pragmatic (but not the least bit spiritual) decision to ally themselves with patrons in powerful secular positions that proudly support the destruction of millions of lives.

I'm not a Catholic (ooops - I hope I can comment), so I don't know the inside baseball in your church.

But perhaps one of you who does know how things really work there could explain to me why, when RC baby priests are excommunicated at the first sign of a crack in their not fully-formed faith (e.g., in Illinois earlier this year), no Bishop, no Archbishop, no Cardinal and no Pope ever got around to excommunicating somebody like Teddy Kennedy for the scandal that his arrogant, obstinate, clergy-tolerated, and decades-long heresy inflicted on the Church ?



If the Church continues to refuse to use any of its simple canonical mechanisms to discipline the Kennedys of the world, the rest of us will just continue to respect the RC clergy and laity that have been consistently putting themselves on the line for the pro-life movement while marveling at their courage and steadfastness in doing so in the face of great lip service, but, in fact, substantive indifference, by the Church hierarchy.