RECUSED: Cardinal O’Brien of Scotland has recused himself from the conclave after allegations of personal sexual misconduct surfaced last month. But Los Angeles’ Cardinal Roger Mahony is in Rome, still determined to participate in the voting despite revelations of (and his apologies for) covering up priestly sexual abuse during his time as Archbishop of LA. This has sparked widespread protests by Catholics who regard his participation as scandalous. But Mahoney’s participation pales next to the truly horrific irony from the last conclave, which elected Benedict XVI. At the time (2005), Sean O’Malley had become Archbishop of Boston but was not yet made a cardinal. Meanwhile Bernard Law, despite his resignation in disgrace from Boston (epicenter of the sex abuse crisis) in 2002, retained his red hat and resided in Rome. So it was that Bernard Law, despite being the scandal's cover-up poster boy, participated and voted in the 2005 conclave--but Boston (the #4 Diocese in the US) had NO VOTE OR VOICE in choosing the next pope! At least this time that is rectified: Law is too old to vote this time, and Cardinal O'Malley will able cast his vote in Boston’s behalf.
BIBLICAL PROPORTIONS: The History Channel has been running a multi-part Lenten series on the Bible, but it took only 5 minutes (on the destruction of Sodom and the fate of Lot’s wife) to form my reaction. Aside from the arch acting style and the surfeit of special effects, the movie most resembles the sand-and-sandal sagas from 1950s Hollywood (see Cecil B. DeMille's “The Ten Commandments”) in portraying Bible narratives as literal events—as “history.” This plays neatly into the rising dominance of evangelical Christianity’s belief in literal interpretation of the bible. Unfortunately, surveys show that the majority of Catholics (and an even larger percentage of regular Mass-goers) go right along with biblical literalism, even though Catholic teaching has made plain since at least the 5th century that, with much of the bible, interpreting literally yields distortion of the text and its meaning. Let’s hope most Catholics skip this sort of fundamentalist propaganda.
ANTI-WAR GOP? With Sen. Rand Paul's filibuster against the use of drones to kill US Citizens, the GOP may have begun re-branding itself on foreign and military policy. Instead of being merely the party that never met a war it didn’t like, growing numbers of party leaders see the risks militarism is posing to both human rights and the constitutional balance of power. For Catholics, this can only be welcome: since most drone use is almost certainly a violation of the Catholic Just War Theory, and since the Obama administration is, if anything, even more aggressive in promoting the use of drones to kill, opposition from the other side of the aisle may compensate for the fact that Democrats, even of the “left,” have been largely silent about the possible breach of international law, violations of humans rights, and even constitutional abuse of presidential power.
©Bernard F. Swain 2013
No comments:
Post a Comment