February 23, 2004--------------------------------------------------
**********************************************
Dear Friend,
I know I just wrote to you on Friday, but I have an important follow-up to my last e-letter that I need to share with you right away.
First, a little history...
In the February issue of CRISIS, we ran an article on the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) titled "Playing Politics: Inside the Bishops' Conference, Part II." In it, the author
explained that, when it comes to political issues, the conference as a whole acts like a group of pro-life Democrats. (If you haven't read the article yet, you can find it here:
http://www.crisismagazine.com/feature2.htm)
Amazingly enough, some people at the conference took objection to that characterization. Certainly not everyone there fits this description, they said. Well, I have to admit, they're right. Not everyone in the Conference is a pro-life Democrat.
Some are just plain Democrats.
A case in point is Ono Ekeh, the administrator of the "Catholics For Kerry" internet newsgroup. You see, when he's not working to get pro-abortion Democrat John Kerry elected president, he can be found at his other job: program coordinator for the Secretariat for African-American Catholics at the USCCB.
As you probably know, the USCCB itself takes a strong pro-life stance, saying that "the well-informed Christian conscience does not permit one to vote for a political policy or an individual law which contradicts the fundamental contents of faith and morals," especially in regards to abortion.
So, how can an employee of the conference go directly against this clear mandate and publicly support a politician who has said repeatedly that he will approve only pro-abortion judges for the Supreme Court?
Journalist Tim Drake tipped me off to Ekeh and his position at the conference. While writing a story on John Kerry, Drake interviewed Ekeh about his support for the senator. When Drake asked about Ekeh's profession, Ekeh simply responded that he was "a small business owner." He made no mention of being employed by the bishops' conference.
It's no wonder -- on the "Catholics for Kerry" site, Ekeh has made several comments that directly challenge the Vatican, the bishops' conference, and even the president of the conference, Bishop Wilton Gregory himself. Not what you'd expect from someone in Gregory's employ.
Predictably, Ekeh goes to great (sometimes downright comical) lengths to justify support for a politician who blatantly rejects the Church's teaching on life issues. Ekeh explains that, instead of opposing abortion, Kerry will target poverty and thus help eliminate the dire financial circumstances that often drive women to abortion. In this way, Ekeh claims, "John Kerry's vision for America is a pro-life vision that will ultimately reduce the frequency of and need for abortions."
I wonder if John Kerry knows that his vision is "pro-life." After all, in my last e-letter I quoted Kerry saying that he wants to EXPAND abortion and make it MORE available, not eliminate poverty to reduce abortion rates. The "vision" Ekeh describes seems to be one he's invented himself.
But Ekeh doesn't end there. He even goes so far as to defend Kerry against the explicit directives from the Vatican and the USCCB that condemn political support for abortion and gay marriage.
With regards to the Vatican's comments on a politician's responsibility to support pro-life legislation, Ekeh boasts that "John Kerry has recently made it clear that he will not be taking orders from the Vatican and rightly so... Senator Kerry made a prudent decision in rejecting the Vatican's demands. Such a rejection does not mean a lack of respect for the Vatican or the Church's teachings. Rather, it highlights that the man understands that his obligations are primarily to the people his [sic] serves and not the Vatican."
He goes on to claim that the pope has never specifically commented on a politician's duty in this regard. Even the "Doctrinal Note on Some Questions Regarding the Participation of Catholics in Political Life" won't convince him, since it was written by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and not the pope himself. (Never mind that the pope gave the Note his complete support and clearly stands behind its message.)
Ekeh gets a bit personal when it comes to his boss, Bishop Gregory. He's especially offended by Gregory's comments regarding gay marriage, where the bishop rightly points out that a Catholic
legislator is in "formal cooperation" with sin if he "does not oppose" legislation in favor of gay unions. Ekeh sniffs that "This is getting as close to excommunication as they would dare in our day and age... This is no less then than a tool of manipulation or control. This is commensurate with how the Holy See controlled politics in the Middle Ages, they had the ultimate threat, the threat of excommunication."
Oh brother.
Look, it's one thing for a Catholic to be a pro-life Democrat -- that in itself is a perfectly legitimate position and consistent with our Catholic Faith. However, it's completely unacceptable to follow Ekeh and trade away our pro-life responsibilities.
As Kerry advances down the presidential campaign trail, and as other Catholics equivocate on his blatantly pro-abortion record, it will become more and more vital for the bishops to speak out. And for the members of the conference itself, the issue is getting a bit close to home.
Talk to you later this week,
Deal
It's truly shameful that this is allowed to continue. How disgusting!
No comments:
Post a Comment