I wouldn't leave America, but I would firmly fight for what I believe to be right in America. And as an American citizen, I have the right to both firmly debate and advocate for the removal from office of those I think are causing harm to others and to our international reputation.
And yes, when the American leader makes an outrageous statement, I believe we have a responsibility and a duty to call it the bullshit it is, make it clear he does not speak for all Americans, and pressure to make change.
Catholics who think such statements as Pope Benedict's are reprehensible have a responsibility to stand up and firmly, sharply make that clear -- and all the moreso because they have no power to remove the Pope from his position. All they can do is rail against the positions he and hte Church take when they veer into hatefulness and spite, and indeed they must do so. If they do not, then they are going to be tarred with their pontiff's opinions as surely as I would be tarred with those of President Bush.
I will not soften a thing about this. We are discussing hatefulness and prejudice, persecution and simple meanness. We are discussing trivializing our fellow man, taking away their right to pursue happiness or indeed just live their own lives away from us. We are discussing bigotry, pure and simple. And it is being done by the leader of the Catholic Church in the name of the Catholic Church -- a leader who can't be removed short of death, and whose doctrines are not subject to revision or review.
What if George Bush declared Martial Law tomorrow, suspended Congress (setting aside blatant illegality for the moment), and made Signing Statements and Executive Orders the only means of disseminating law in the land? What if he could direct the course of education without a legal challenge or without any check on him. What is your responsibility then? To quietly seethe, or to scream from the hilltops?
As I said to Snowspinner -- you can't take Catholicism a la carte. If the Pope or other Ecclesiastical Authority makes statements you find reprehensible, you have three choices: 1) you can say nothing save maybe to close friends, granting tacit approval despite your disagreement; 2) you can speak out, debate, cause a ruckus, and try to do something about the things you find reprehensible while preserving the things you love; 3) you can decide that the offensive doctrinal points can't be reconciled with your worldview and you can seek a spiritual or theological system and organization more in keeping with your personal views.
You mention that you fundamentally agree with the tenets that the USA was founded on. One of those tenets -- the core reason any of us are here -- comes from people who decided they couldn't abide the untenable positions their society held any longer. And when that society imposed the Intolerable Acts on their colonies, denying the Colonists the right to even protest or be represented in their legislature, we said "fuck that" and went to war.
Right now, we have the power as a people to force governmental change. And we have the responsibility to use that power when our government goes corrupt, venal or actively evil. The only power a Catholic has to force Catholicism to change is vigorous debate. Absent that, or absent a receptive audience, their only power to stand up for what is right, in the end, is to leave.
My original post's core point is this: Catholics don't have the innate defense others have had. They can't claim that Pope Benedict "doesn't speak for them." He does speak for them. If they don't like what he's saying, then they're the ones who have to do something about it. Otherwise, they bear the burden of tacit approval.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2008-12-24 05:49 am (UTC)And yes, when the American leader makes an outrageous statement, I believe we have a responsibility and a duty to call it the bullshit it is, make it clear he does not speak for all Americans, and pressure to make change.
Catholics who think such statements as Pope Benedict's are reprehensible have a responsibility to stand up and firmly, sharply make that clear -- and all the moreso because they have no power to remove the Pope from his position. All they can do is rail against the positions he and hte Church take when they veer into hatefulness and spite, and indeed they must do so. If they do not, then they are going to be tarred with their pontiff's opinions as surely as I would be tarred with those of President Bush.
I will not soften a thing about this. We are discussing hatefulness and prejudice, persecution and simple meanness. We are discussing trivializing our fellow man, taking away their right to pursue happiness or indeed just live their own lives away from us. We are discussing bigotry, pure and simple. And it is being done by the leader of the Catholic Church in the name of the Catholic Church -- a leader who can't be removed short of death, and whose doctrines are not subject to revision or review.
What if George Bush declared Martial Law tomorrow, suspended Congress (setting aside blatant illegality for the moment), and made Signing Statements and Executive Orders the only means of disseminating law in the land? What if he could direct the course of education without a legal challenge or without any check on him. What is your responsibility then? To quietly seethe, or to scream from the hilltops?
As I said to Snowspinner -- you can't take Catholicism a la carte. If the Pope or other Ecclesiastical Authority makes statements you find reprehensible, you have three choices: 1) you can say nothing save maybe to close friends, granting tacit approval despite your disagreement; 2) you can speak out, debate, cause a ruckus, and try to do something about the things you find reprehensible while preserving the things you love; 3) you can decide that the offensive doctrinal points can't be reconciled with your worldview and you can seek a spiritual or theological system and organization more in keeping with your personal views.
You mention that you fundamentally agree with the tenets that the USA was founded on. One of those tenets -- the core reason any of us are here -- comes from people who decided they couldn't abide the untenable positions their society held any longer. And when that society imposed the Intolerable Acts on their colonies, denying the Colonists the right to even protest or be represented in their legislature, we said "fuck that" and went to war.
Right now, we have the power as a people to force governmental change. And we have the responsibility to use that power when our government goes corrupt, venal or actively evil. The only power a Catholic has to force Catholicism to change is vigorous debate. Absent that, or absent a receptive audience, their only power to stand up for what is right, in the end, is to leave.
My original post's core point is this: Catholics don't have the innate defense others have had. They can't claim that Pope Benedict "doesn't speak for them." He does speak for them. If they don't like what he's saying, then they're the ones who have to do something about it. Otherwise, they bear the burden of tacit approval.