Cardinal Timothy Dolan (R-NY)?
Cardinal Dolan will offer a endorsement prayer during the Republican National Convention in Tampa next week. From the AP:
Roman Catholic Cardinal Timothy Dolan will give the benediction at the Republican National Convention on the night Mitt Romney accepts the presidential nomination. The cardinal's spokesman said the appearance was not an endorsement.
Dolan is the New York archbishop and president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. Romney announced Dolan's appearance in an interview with Raymond Arroyo's "The World Over Live" on EWTN Catholic network.
The archdiocese is one of more than 40 Catholic groups suing President Barack Obama over his mandate that employers provide health insurance that includes free birth control as a preventive service. The rule exempts houses of worship but includes faith-affiliated employers such as hospitals, charities and colleges.
The Cardinal’s office is insisting that his appearance at the national gathering of Republicans, on the night when they endorse
Mitt Romney for president, on national television, is not an endorsement, but simply “a priest going to pray.” If Cardinal Dolan were an ordinary parish priest, fine. But as Archbishop of New York and president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Cardinal Dolan must know that his appearance anywhere, especially in political matters as he sues the Obama Administration, is much more than “a priest going to pray.”
How can the photos that will emerge of the Cardinal at the GOP convention, perhaps even with Romney and Ryan themselves, imply something other than an endorsement from arguably the nation’s most prominent Catholic cleric? How does this foster unity and not alienate a large segment of Catholics from their church leaders, especially as polls show that most Catholics plan to vote for Obama over Romney? Offering a prayer at a government event is one thing, but attending a purely partisan political convention is quite another. Political power is fleeting, and the church’s message must be eternal.
The cozy relationship between a sizable portion of U.S. bishops and the Republican Party should be cause for concern, and not just among progressive Catholics. For the church to be able to live out its role as prophet, it cannot be tied to one political party. Cardinal Dolan’s appearance in Tampa will damage the church’s ability to be a moral and legitimate voice for voiceless, as those who view the Catholic Church as being a shill for the GOP have just a bit more evidence to prove their case.
Michael J. O’Loughlin
http://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/cardinal-roger-mahony-and-former-vice-president-al-gore-news-photo/53180758
http://www.upi.com/topic/Roger_Mahony/
Democrats will never have a Mormon come near their convention. They hate them even more than orthodox Catholics.
And what's with this ''Timmy Dolan'' or your recent ''Joey Ratzinger''? You made a great brouhaha for a misspelling of O'Loughlin's name a short while ago (comments to Michael's Aug 2 column), saying it was rude and puerile to deliberately mess with someone's name. You said only a total jerk would do it. So much for coherence or consistency!
As regards your frequent put-downs about the Cardinal's coherence, you are mistaking plain colloquial speaking with packaged eloquence (like our Teleprompter President). It might be useful for you to read Cardinal Dolan’s speech to the College of Cardinals in Feb (http://cnsblog.wordpress.com/2012/02/17/cardinal-designate-dolans-address-to-pope-benedict-and-the-college-of-cardinals/).
Rick #8
Please check your sources before calling people liars. Harry Reid is not pro-life in any action he has taken as Senate Majority Leader. He wouldn't even let the ban on sex-selection abortion come up for a vote. He has received 100% rating from NARAL and 0% from the NRL. As regards your memory of the Casey snub, here is a review of what happened from a liberal source (defending the snub): http://www.themediareport.com/2008/11/01/the-truth-about-gov-bob-casey-and-the-1992-dnc-convention/
"So, I have a message to my Catholic Democratic friends: Yes, the pictures of Cardinal Dolan standing on the platform with Mr. Romney and Mr. Ryan will make you upset. But, should you blame the cardinal for this or should you blame your own party? It is, in the strictest sense of the word, a shame that only one political party can be counted on to recognize the significance of religion in American culture by inviting the most recognizable face of the Catholic Church to pray with them, but the shame belongs with the Democrats, not with the Republicans and certainly not with Cardinal Dolan."
HUH? Michael Sean Winters in the Grand Inquisitor?
In today's world, nearly all the anti-Catholic bigots in politics have gathered into one party.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HLZPbQIK-c
then there is a clear-cut case for removing the Catholic Church's tax exemption and requiring it to register as a political lobby.
Maybe the Democrats should invite Thomas Monson to give a prayer. I'd bet he would sound a lot more coherent and Christian than Timmy Dolan will.
Does anyone really think Mahoney is a right-wing GOP shill?
That remains false, one of the lies that crowd propogates. He was not allowed to speak because he would not endorse the nominee. Harry Reid is Pro-Life; neither party is accomodating of the other side on this issue, but there is no GOP equivalent of Reid.
Helen otherwise has it exactly correct why the two appearances (Mahoney in LA in 200 and Dolan now) are not equivalent. Abshp Dolan plinly wants to make the conference a partisan political actor - Ad Majorem GOP Gloriam.
So you vehemntly disagreed with their public criticism of Ryan's budget?
Somebody should tell Harry Reid. He's probably already booked a flight.
"So much for coherence or consistency!"
The difference is that Timmy is His Ponderous Corpulency's name, and Josef was Wehrmachtgefreiter Ratzinger's name, and Michael's name is not O'Laughlin.
Cardinal Dolan is our fellow United States citizen.
He is free to say whatever he wants to whomever he wants.
And by the same token, no one has to listen to what he has to say.
It is a tactical move than ushers in strategic failure for the constructive role the Church might have had in this higly charged year.
I think it is like those touted videos of certain Floridda vacations "Cardinal's ego goes wild... "
Now what if the Hurricane hits the same night?
Divine intervention?
It would be insane for example for the Church to the silent in its opposition to abortion or any other moral issue under the threat of losing its tax exemption as is often threatened by political activist oppossed to the Church. Such threats to limit the Church ability to speech and act are inherently politcal and must be vigorously politically oppossed.
A priest's prayer of a rank and file status has the same value before God than that of one from the Cardinal. This choice will remove any doubts about endorsing one party or the other.
I wish the Hierarchy would listen to the laity! Let's keep politics or an imge of partidism away from our Church.
In case Carlos wasn't able to find the WH website and actually read the administration spokespersons comments, here they are: "The United States is disappointed by the verdict, including the disproportionate sentences that were granted. While we understand the group’s behavior was offensive to some, we have serious concerns about the way that these young women have been treated by the Russian judicial system." And then, this from the State Department: "The United States is concerned about both the verdict and the disproportionate sentences handed down by a Moscow court in the case against the members of the band Pussy Riot and the negative impact on freedom of expression in Russia,"
I half-heartedly apologize for my comment at #35. That because I find this article to be a non-issue after Cardinal Dolan offered to also pray at the Democratic convention.
http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1203567.htm
But that would probably make the top senior members of the current administration feel quite uncomfortable (President, Vice-President and Secretary of State), as the three have partial-birth abortion voting records in the Senate.
With respect to Pussy Riot and the White House communique:
1.- What does the President gain by butting into Russian internal matters? How would Kremlin statements expressing "disappointment" on, say, White House stonewalling on congressional inquiry into Fast and Furious be received in Washington?
2.- Would the White House have been equally "concerned about the verdict and the disproportionate sentences" if the Pussy Riot band desecrated a synagogue of a mosque? Western media, its attention whores (singer Madonna and the likes) and politicians would not have been nearly as enthusiastic in the defense of the indefensible.
3.- Oh but at the W.H. they are gracious enough to understand that the group's behaviour was "offensive to some". Really??? You don't say!!! I am not Russian Orthodox but I was mad as hell.
A little history on the astonishingly beautiful Christ Savior Cathedral: it was erected as an offering of thanksgiving to God, from the czar and the Russian people, for the defeat of the Napoleonic army -that even occupied Moscow- before being almost completely aniquilated by the Russian army. In the 20th century, Stalin had it blown down so a giant monument to Lenin be constructed, which never materialized. The recently reconstructed cathedral is a replica of the first and, to Russian Christians, it now also represents the triumph of God over Communism.
I hope the above has enough facts for you.
The answer to your questions are:
1)it is important for the U.S. government to speak out against policial oppression/injustice (the GOP jumps on the administration for not doing so in other cases);
2)I don't know the answer to your second question but you seem certain that it is "no."
3)Your third point/question is. . .what-saracasm? The WH stated that Pussy Riot was offensive to some people. Why was that wrong to say?
In any case, why on earth is Dolan going around fishing for an invitation to pray at political conventions? This seems like a lame effort to be relevant.
Finally, I'm not as giddy about expensive reconstrutions of churches as you are. And I don't share your understanding of Christianity vanquishing communism in the USSR/Russia. BTW, have you ever visited Russia?
Now if Bishop Lynch told the Republicans to take a hike, that would be one thing. But somehow I think he would be more respectful of the visitors to his diocese than they have been of him.
Cardinal Dolan, alas, has also fallen into bad messaging, it may be good PR strategy for the RNC but not good for the Catholics. C'est la vie! Give to Caesar what is to Caesar...
THIS week he's a GOP hack who's selling out the Gospel.
BOTH sides made the same arguments.
Maybe Dolan isn't the problem.
If Dolan does something like this, he will do more than just "...alienate a large segment of Catholics from their church leaders". He will have crossed a line of separation between Church and State that was set, not by the nation's founding fathers, but by Jesus.
I think it would be good for the leaders of the Catholic Church to consider the reason for their existence - deeply consider it, not just assume it is about telling people how to live and using the people's government to force them to live that way. Last I heard, capitalism was not the road to eternal life.
I wonder who will be opening and closing the Democratic convention in Charlotte? There's nothing on their convention web site yet.
But I also agree that this kind of political alliance should be rare and temporary, provided the offending party doesn’t just double down in its hostility to the Church after the election.
Amy #15 I should have said orthodox Mormon. Harry Reid might be the best ever example of a token, being pro-gay and pro-abortion in every action while claiming to be otherwise. By the way, the NYT says he will be the keynote speaker to the LDS Dems (ldsdems.org). I wonder who else was in the running. Maybe, Barbara Marx Hubbard turned them down. These efforts are like those of the other fraudulent groups ''Catholics for Choice'' or “Atheists for Jesus” - trying to muddy the waters to confuse the gullible and distracted.
http://www.usccb.org/upload/economic_justice_for_all.pdf
Why does Josh keep pasting Sean Michael Winters' quotes on postings that deal with Democrats and religion? Is he supposed to be a "slam dunk" or something? I find his thinking to be particularly thoughtful and he makes grandious statements far too often. Let's read your words Josh.
Who cares what Dolan does? THe USCCB and the bishops are political operatives in the GOP.
I could have been clearer in my initial statement. I was talking about present day pro-life, pro-heterosexual marriage Mormons. I don't think any of your examples apply, as the only 2 you listed in Congress today are Harry Reid and Tom Udall, both pro-abortion and pro-gay marriage in their votes and public statements.
But I will concede an error if I see any Mormon speaker at the Democratic Convention mention the sanctity of human life and marriage (as in wanting to protect them). As of now, I see in the press releases that that Planned Parenthood's Cecile Richards will speak, along with Sandra Fluke (maybe to say a ''laity'' prayer).
This all comes down to honesty in representation and in the priority of one's religious vs. political beliefs. The same goes for people who vote against Catholic moral teaching yet still claim they are Catholics. Honesty is just not a priority for them.
As things stand, both of the major national parties stand for things that are fundamentally repugnant to the Church, and are just digging deeper. Dressing it up with purple or scarlet is merely a Potemkin village.
Or, maybe, the remaining Pussy Riot members that are not incarcerated in Russia. They could even dance on the floor of the Democrat convention, like they did in the Christ Savior cathedral in Moscow. After all, the President already expressed his support to the punk hooligans via the White House spokesman.
Never mind his opinions-I wouldn't mind a few facts from him now & again.
In fact, the bishops should shut up and start living the social teachings they claim to represent. Perhaps then traditional Catholics like me will pay attention.
I care very little about the vaunted social justice model the Church proffers. Why? Because the Church isn't democratic, earnest, or transparent on even the smallest financial matters, or much else, locally or nationally or internationally. So how dare they condone or condemn the political activities of the laity.
Open the books, let us see where the money goes, how it moves, who it serves, and why, and always how much. Until then, I am voting my wallet, just like Rome. Not a penny for Peter until he speaks the truth. So there.
Mo Udall nearly won the Democratic nomination in 1976 and was short-listed for Vice President.
Dick Swett was the first Democrat elected from New Hampshire's 2nd congressional district in 80 years and came within a point of being elected to the US Senate.
Harry Reid is the Majority Leader in the US Senate.
Tom Udall, US Senator from New Mexico.
Ambassador Bob King, US Special Envoy for Human Rights in North Korea and former Chief of Staff to Democratic Congressman Tom Lantos.
Next argument, please.