Separation of church and state should be held high
By FR. MICHAEL J. KAVANAUGH — Special to The Telegraph
Apr 18, 2012
The Catholic Church in the United States has benefited, greatly at times, from the non-establishment clause in our Constitution. Although many of the earliest European settlements in North America were founded by Spanish Catholics, as the English came to dominate colonization here, Catholics quickly became a persecuted minority. Along with other “non-conforming” sects such as Quakers in the northeast and Baptists in the mid-Atlantic region, Catholics were, for many decades, barred from holding public office, voting or testifying in court proceedings.
Historian John Tracy Ellis wrote that a, “... universal anti-Catholic bias was brought to Jamestown in 1607 and vigorously cultivated in all the 13 colonies from Massachusetts to Georgia.” Catholicism, once a persecuted minority religion, has become the largest Christian denomination in the United States. Without seeking to force others to adopt our religious beliefs, Catholics and people of all faiths, or of no faith, seek to bring our values and ethics into the public sphere through political dialogue and, if necessary, protest.
While the political community and the church are autonomous and independent of each other, both are devoted to the true advancement of the citizens of our nation and of the world. The “separation of church and state” that has protected and advanced all religions in America, and that has prevented the institutionalized intolerance that many of our Founding Fathers and mothers fled, does not entail a separation that excludes cooperation or participation.
All religious bodies have a right to expect that no governmental entity at the local, state, or national level will interfere with their internal policies or try to force them to participate in practices they believe to be immoral.
On Jan. 20, the Department of Health and Human Services reaffirmed a rule forcing virtually all private health care plans to cover sterilization, abortifacients and contraception.
This is a clear violation of the separation of church and state, an intrusion that should be opposed by people of any religious denomination. In fact, leaders from the Orthodox churches, the Southern Baptist Convention, the Lutheran Church and Orthodox rabbis, among others, have expressed their opposition to the HHS mandate, noting that this is not a “Catholic” issue, but a matter of religious freedom and freedom of conscience.
Cardinal Donald Wuerl, Chuck Colson and Rabbi Meir Soloveichik co-authored an editorial that appeared in The Wall Street Journal on Feb. 10. They wrote “Under no circumstances should people of faith violate their consciences and discard their most cherished beliefs in order to comply with an unjust law.”
Father Michael J. Kavanaugh is pastor of Holy Spirit Catholic Church in Macon.
17 comments:
A broken clock tells the right time twice a day!
Very nice article.
There is, of course, nothing in the Constitution about the separation of church and state. What there is, in the 1st amendment, is the language "Congress shall make no law..."
It seems abundantly clear that the constraint was intended to be on government, and that it was in no way intended to limit the activities of any church. Yet over time, it has been used to assert, more to limit church than state.
This would be odd, were it not for the fact that there is a very long history of legislation which delivers the opposite to what its title would suggest.
I believe that the framers understood, and we should too, that government is a primary field of endeavor for the Evil One. Eternal vigilance is certainly required. But more than that, we seem to have settled in to the belief that the three branches will check one another. The framers saw the people as a fourth branch, for purposes of checking government action. But if the people continue to accept whatever the elected sinners do, then our fate is a dark one.
Entropy always increases; the only way to counter it is with the application of force.
Well, it doesn't really say anything. It is a fairly vanilla statement of a generic Catholic position that everyone already knows.
A caveat: Do Pater Ignotus/Kavanaugh and other modernist Catholics have any understanding that the positions they take on other issues of Catholic identity, theology, and worship, as well as political and social issues, and their mindless parroting of the secular mantra of "social justice" are a large factor in what has brought us to this point? I think the chord is a very poor B flat major...
Well I like it. Here's why: Fr. Kavanaugh is explaining how a citizen of a Republic, who has an overriding religious interest, is affected by a secular action of that State. This is important in that it avoids the same error the State is makes by placing religious values in conflict with those of the State when they are not naturally in conflict. The State has determined that all citizens must finance a voluntary, non-mandatory action, abortion. It would be wrong for Fr Kavanaugh to declare the State must obey God's will, when the State has no personality and, in fact, it is the people who do God's will and, at least in earlier times, the State obeys them.
I think this is important also because it opens the door to the concept that any coercion to 'right' and 'just' actually interdicts them, not just in the case of abortion.
rcg
Gene,
Not everybody knows it. Therein lies the problem. The American hierarchy has done its darnedest to keep from teaching it to people for nearly fifty years now.
If anyone wants some First Amendment 101 and how it relates to the HHS mandate, see my post here at http://cemeterypicnic.blogspot.com/2012/03/free-exercise-101.html
I do not question Fr. Kavanaugh's love and devotion to Our Lord, but there is a great irony to him writing that article. I'm afraid, his chicken has come home to roost. Gene W. said it well....:
A caveat: Do Pater Ignotus/Kavanaugh and other modernist Catholics have any understanding that the positions they take on other issues of Catholic identity, theology, and worship, as well as political and social issues, and their mindless parroting of the secular mantra of "social justice" are a large factor in what has brought us to this point? I think the chord is a very poor B flat major...
I would be willing to bet good money that Kavanaugh will vote for Obama again (his voting for him the first time is probably a foregone conclusion). There are many other Priests and nuns who will do the same, not to mention lay Catholics. This is inexcusable, not only because of the health care issues, but because this administration clearly hates the Church, Christianity, and America as founded. It represents socialism/communism, which the Catechism clearly and unequivocably condemns. Catholics who support it and vote for it are either stupid, naive, or enemies of the Church and country. Most are all of the above. I suggest having nothing to do with them, even if it means shunning former friends as I have done. Pray for them, certainly, but only as you might pray for your deadliest enemy. In the meantime, keep your weapons sharp...
This comment is for Gene. I am sickened by your comments. Your blatant disrespect for the clergy is appalling. No matter how much you disagree with Father Kavanaugh respect should be shown for his office as a priest ordained by God. Ordination has mark him for all eternity as a priest of God. A priest should NEVER, NEVER, NEVER be shown disrespect. No matter how much you disagree with him, a priest MUST be shown respect. Please do not refer to him as Kavanaugh it must always be Father Kavanaugh.
Lastly, let me just caution you that such disrespect can jeopardize the salvation of you soul!
Donna
Donna, Oh, bull. Pater Ignotus has my respect when he is in persona Christi. Otherwise, I consider him just another Modernist Priest. By the way, how do you get from my criticizing Ignotus/Kavanaugh to "blatant disrespect for the clergy?" That is pretty poor logic...
There are certainly a lot of "musts" and "shoulds" in your post. What is this thing you have with imperatives? You may also want to consider Kavanaugh's disrespectful comments to Fr. MacDonald in the past...oh, that's right, you respect him too much to comment on those. Hey, if my comments sicken you, try Pepto Bismol. Maybe Fr. Kavanaugh will bless a bottle of it for you...
Pin, you should change you ways or you'll risk and after life surrounded by clergy.
rcg
Gene, One can disagree with Father without showing disrespect to his office.
Anon, Indeed so.
Pin sez that Social Justice is a “secular mantra.”
The Church sez: "Society ensures SOCIAL JUSTICE when it provides the conditions that allow associations or individuals to obtain what is their due, according to their nature and their vocation. SOCIAL JUSTICE is linked to the common good and the exercise of authority. " (Catechism of the Catholic Church 1928)
And, "SOCIAL JUSTICE can be obtained only in respecting the transcendent dignity of man. The person represents the ultimate end of society, which is ordered to him: What is at stake is the dignity of the human person, whose defense and promotion have been entrusted to us by the Creator, and to whom the men and women at every moment of history are strictly and responsibly in debt.[John Paul II, SRS 47.] " (CCC 1929)
And, "There exist also sinful inequalities that affect millions of men and women. These are in open contradiction of the Gospel: Their equal dignity as persons demands that we strive for fairer and more humane conditions. Excessive economic and SOCIAL disparity between individuals and peoples of the one human race is a source of scandal and militates against SOCIAL JUSTICE, equity, human dignity, as well as SOCIAL and international peace.[CS 29 # 3.] " (CCC 1938)
And, "The development of economic activity and growth in production are meant to provide for the needs of human beings. Economic life is not meant solely to multiply goods produced and increase profit or power; it is ordered first of all to the service of persons, of the whole man, and of the entire human community. Economic activity, conducted according to its own proper methods, is to be exercised within the limits of the moral order, in keeping with SOCIAL JUSTICE so as to correspond to God's plan for man.[Cf. GS 64.] " (CCC 2426)
And there are thousands of other references that show that Pin is, again, simply wrong. I suspect that his political ideology blinds him and, unfortunately, many others to the clear teaching of the Church regarding Social Justice.
Ignotus/Kavanaugh, we have been through this before and, typically, you simply refuse to listen but parrot back your same disingenuous appropriation of Church teaching. I am very aware of the Church's teachings on social justice; however, what the Church means by it and what the modernist/progressive Catholics mean by it are two very different things. Modernists simply adopt the socialist ideology of the political Left and chant the same mindless nonsense about "social just us" that any good Marxist would.
But, wait, you don't really think that when Amos warned, "Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like an everflowing stream," he was talking about the same kind of justice they hand out at the Supreme Court or down at the Bibb County Courthouse...do you...I mean, DO YOU?!?
Pin - If anything I have "parrotted" is NOT part of the teaching of the Church, please indicate where I have erred.
If everything I have "parrotted" is part and parcel of the Church's teaching (and it is), why do you refer to it as part of a "secular" mantra?
Ignotus, You still refuse to respond to my point. Any dammned fool can repeat the Church's teaching by rote.
I guess this means that Pater Ignotus (Father Michael J. Kavanaugh) is going to vote a straight Republican ticket come November.
Post a Comment