Jeffrey Miller

New York’s Timothy Cardinal Dolan made it clear this morning that if Gov. Cuomo proceeds with his plans to strengthen state abortion laws, he will face the wrath of the Catholic Bishops.

“I am going to hope that the better natures prevail here, but boy if you come out you can expect us to be as vociferous and rigorous as possible in our opposition to this,” Dolan said during an interview with an Albany radio station Tuesday. “I hope we don’t go there.”

Dolan went so far as to suggest that Cuomo might not be considered a Catholic in good standing if goes forward.

“I don’t mind telling you that’s one of the things the governor and I talk about,” Dolan said.

“Look, he and I have very grave differences, and this is one of them… That’s something that we talk about and that’s something that I talk turkey with him about.”

This story was later updated:

UPDATED – Dolan spokesman Joe Zwilling just emailed a note clarifying Dolan’s comments on the radio, saying “Cardinal Dolan would not and did not suggest the governor might not be a Catholic in good standing going forward. The subject he ‘talks turkey’ about was abortion.”

Dolan’s comment’s came in a response to a question that asked how Cuomo “could be a leader on an issue that the church so fundamentally feels strongly about, opposes, abortion, and still be considered a Catholic in good standing.” (source)

One thing I have wondered about just exactly what does the term “Catholic in good standing” mean anyway? If Pelosi, Biden, and Cuomo can use those terms concerning themselves it doesn’t mean very much. Does the term have any actual definition from the Church? I’ve heard the term bandied about and while the definition of it seems common sensical. The Knights of Columbus use this term in regards to membership. The practical application of the term seems to mean someone not formally excommunicated and so ends up not meaning very much at all. Somehow I feel that after I die, telling Jesus “I was a Catholic in good standing” won’t be very helpful.

“Cardinal Dolan would not and did not suggest the governor might not be a Catholic in good standing going forward.”

If Gov. Cuomo who supports multiple intrinsic evils in his political life and commits adultery with his live-in girlfriend can be considered a “Catholic in good standing” then talk about mixed-messages.

Now I can understand pastoral sensitivities, but I don’t understand the sensitivity about this term which I believe has no canonical weight. Certainly I am frustrated by my internal feeling that “Catholic in good standing” actually means “Bishop unwilling to act.” I know that is more hyperbole than truth, but I keep waiting for a Bishop/Politician interaction where the dialogue and the dissent does not just keep going on and on. But as usual whining about Bishops is much easier than praying for them and for those “Catholics in good standing.”

Hilary Towers writing at NRO:

Once upon a time in this country, moral integrity, emotional (and even spiritual) maturity, and a servant’s heart were considered important characteristics of public leaders. In Mark Sanford we find a case study in how far removed we’re becoming from that standard. When did abandoning one’s spouse and children for an extramarital affair become compatible with conservativism? [sic] Apologies are meaningless when they are followed by more of the same. Sanford describes himself as “one imperfect man saved by God’s grace.” But the problem with this win (and here is who South Carolina voters could have elected if they had put values first) isn’t that Sanford isn’t perfect. Marriage is hard, and every spouse has virtues and vices — defects of character with which they will struggle throughout their married lives. But marriages don’t “fall apart” as a result of falling in love with another person; they are all too often destroyed from within by a self-love that transcends marital bonds and spills over into every aspect of one’s existence. It is time for conservatives to publicly recognize the widespread phenomenon of spousal abandonment, and the system of “family law” that supports it, for what they both are — a national scandal.

Among other things, this election result is a searing reminder that we have, as a nation, lost touch with what “redemption” really means — with the true power of God’s grace, which is the power to transform behavior. And behavior, after all, is a reflection of the heart. How much longer can conservative stewards of family values turn a blind eye to the very narcissistic lifestyle choices of our leaders that we are fighting so hard to weaken (and ultimately transform) in society at large?

If repentance means marrying the women you committed adultery with, you’re doing it wrong.

If only this was contained to the “narcissistic lifestyle choices of our leaders.” The reason this pasts muster in the first place is that divorce and “remarriage” has become so accepted. Hard to hold politicians to a standard when the standard behavior of so many is exactly the same thing.

I heard callers on the Laura Ingraham show who were not concerned at all about his behavior because he votes the right way. The same as for the defense of President Clinton on the other side. The excuse always is that the other candidate will be worse for the country. Yet this never explains how seriously morally compromised candidates get nominated in the first place instead as if they were the only option.

Over a week ago Cardinal Dolan had blogged on the topic “All Are Welcome!”

My buddy Freddie from across the street and I were playing outside. Mom called me for supper.

“Can Freddie stay and eat supper with us?” I asked.

“He’d sure be welcome, if it’s okay with his mom and dad,” she replied.

“Thanks, Mrs. Dolan,” Freddie replied. “I’m sure it’s okay, because mom and dad are out, and the babysitter was just going to make me a sandwich whenever I came in.”

I was so proud and happy. Freddie was welcome in our house, at our table. We both rushed in and sat down.

“Freddie, glad you’re here,” dad remarked, “but … looks like you and Tim better go wash your hands before you eat.”

Simple enough … common sense … you are a most welcome and respected member now of our table, our household, dad was saying, but, there are a few very natural expectations this family has. Like, wash your hands!…

So it is with the supernatural family we call the Church: all are welcome!

…

So, for example, the Church loves, welcomes, and respects the alcoholic … but would not condone his binge;

The Church loves, welcomes, and respects a prominent business leader…but would not condone his or her failure to pay a just wage to a migrant worker;

The Church loves, welcomes, and respects a young couple in love … but would challenge their decision to “live together” before marriage;

The Church loves, welcomes, and respects a woman who has had an abortion, and the man who fathered the child and encouraged the abortion … but would be united with them in mourning and regretting that deadly choice;

The Church loves, welcomes, and respects a woman or man with a same-sex attraction … while reminding him or her of our clear teaching that, while the condition of homosexuality is no sin at all, still, God’s teaching is clear that sexual acts are reserved for a man and woman united in the lifelong, life-giving, faithful, loving bond of marriage.

The Church loves, welcomes, and respects wealthy people, while prophetically teaching the at-times-uncomfortable virtue of justice and charity towards the poor.

We are part of a Church where, yes, all are welcome, but, no, not a Church of anything goes.

The Cardinal did make some good points, although he constant use of elipses made his post confusing in parts and really could have been better written.

So of course the result of this blog post is that there were a group of protesters outside of St. Patrick’s.

Angry and greedy rich people were mad that the cardinal for talking as if greed was sin and equating them as having dirty hands. Oh wait that wasn’t the group.

It was alcoholics who were mad that the cardinal for talking as if alcoholism was sin and equating them as having dirty hands. Oh wait that wasn’t the group.

No of course it was an LGBT group with protest signs and hands dipped in ash.

Honestly my first reaction was “What a bunch of drama queens” although that thought was not intentionally pejorative and I don’t mean it in a pejorative sense here. Still those supporting homosexual acts are very good at staging events to get the media’s attention. In this case we are suppose to believe that for example that while the Catechism says the Church “has always declared that ”homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered” it was the Cardinal talking about washing your hands that was so greatly offensive. This is just another staged controversy looking for coverage and rewarded by the automatic media coverage.

Of course we got headlines like Cardinal Dolan Denies Catholics Entry at Cathedral Because of Dirty Hands and Gay Catholic Group Threatened With Arrest During Silent Protest. The typical lack of concern for truth.

Apparently if you bring in protest signs inside to where the President is speaking it is fine if you are arrested, but if you do the same thing inside a Catholic church that is totally unreasonable. Although they did not in fact attempt this. This is all very much like the Rainbow Sash movement that use to (or still does?) make a sash of themselves on Pentecost Sunday.

It is sad how activists and the media totally distort this story. Still “What is truth” and the person who said that washed their hands of it.

See also:

• Pat Archbold at NCRegister on this.