[Music]
just a couple weeks ago two very
prominent Catholic women held forth on
the relation between the church and
civil society
the first was Kathleen Sebelius Health
and Human Services Secretary in a speech
given to Georgetown and then the second
was Maureen Dowd the columnist for The
New York Times
now Dowd's article was a bit of a screed
Sebelius's talk was much more measured
but both gave voice to what I think are
two really fundamental misunderstandings
that our sadly widespread and society
today let's start with the Dowd's
article first echoing really an army of
commentators from the past 50 years she
exalts in James Joyce's characterization
of a church
supposedly drawn from the pages of
Finnegan's Wake as here comes everybody
so the word Catholic cotta Hallows means
according to the whole it means
inclusive it means universal so at its
best the church you know reaches out
includes all things and all people
how sad therefore she said the church
has become you know cramped and
restricting whether its disciplining
liberal nuns or it's speaking out
against a pro-choice commencement
speakers the church seems to have
abandoned the better angels of its
nature and turning it with very cramped
and defensive you know society here's a
quote now from her article it's in her
typically over-the-top style
she says absolute intolerance is always
a sign of uncertainty and panic why do
you have to hunt down everyone unless
you're weak but what is the quality of a
belief that exists simply if it's
enforced not only is this narrow-minded
aggression on Catholic it's downright
unpatriotic this is America we don't
hunt heresies here we welcome them
okay what's the misunderstanding it's
this fundamental one between inclusivity
in regard to people and inclusivity in
regard to ideas is the church
universally inclusive in principle yes I
would say because the church wants to
draw everyone into
the life of Christ think of the great
image of the Bernini colonnade if you
look at st. Peter's from above you see
the arms reaching out and people indeed
do flood into that Square from all over
the world and the idea is the mother
church gathering in everyone in
principle the church is radically
inclusive that way but ideas are
something different from the beginning
the church has held off sometimes very
aggressively certain ideas which are
repugnant to its essential nature the
church is not a volte Arian debating
society by which I mean just a group
that comes together and that's just
debate and see where the argument leads
us and we're not that we're a religion
based upon Revelation grounded in
certain truths that define our very
nature which is why from the earliest
centuries
you've got great theologians and great
defenders of the faith who very
aggressively excluded certain ideas from
the the Catholic community it's a way of
maintaining the integrity of a faith
based upon a certain definite revelation
and I want to broaden it a little bit to
show how absolutely taken for granted
this is in other areas of life
suppose you are a member of the Abraham
Lincoln Society you're a proud member of
that society and someone proposed do you
know what I think we should abandon
Lincoln we should study Winston
Churchill well I mean I love Winston
Churchill but with nowhere the Lincoln
society we're defined by our
preoccupation with with Lincoln suppose
you're a member of the USGA United
States Golf Association and someone says
you know Pebble Beach greatest golf
course in the world let's turn that into
a whole series of baseball diamonds well
your if you're the least bit passionate
about the USGA you'd say well absolutely
not
this is undermining the whole purpose of
our of our society so a church that
simply welcomed any idea would cease to
be itself in very short order now here's
the second misunderstanding and it's um
it's unclear display in the Sibelius
speech she rather definitely sidestepped
the HHS controversy
which has been very much in the news and
she talked more generically about
church-state and drew our attention to
john f kennedy's famous october 1960
speech to a group of protestant
ministers in houston famous beach
because JFK lays out this very sharp
delineation between church and state and
I'm going to just quote the line that
Sebelius cited very positively
JFK dreamed of an America quote in which
no religious body seeks to impose its
will either directly or indirectly on
the general populace now as I say you
can hear that call echoed over and over
again in the last 50 years anyone that's
interested in the other church-state
separation will cite that very strong
statement of JFK see but here's the
problem the problem is that this vision
if we really follow it would exclude
some of the great figures and great
moments in our political and moral
history see any public speech any law
any policy move is an attempt to impose
your will directly or indirectly if I
have a law saying you only drive 55 that
was an attempt by the by the state to
impose its will on people now go back
over our history go back to the 19th
century and we got William Lloyd
Garrison and you've got John Brown
Lincoln himself all of whom were opposed
to slavery and using different
strategies but we're all trying to
impose their will on a more or less
recalcitrant country think of Abraham
Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation it
was by no means I mean he reversely
accepted what was Lincoln trying to do
he was trying to impose his will look at
Martin Luther King in the 20th century
here's someone coming clearly out of the
religious tradition very much formed by
the biblical vision and through his
marches and through his demonstrations
and through his great public orations
was very much trying to impose his will
on us still largely a recalcitrant
reluctant country I think for example
not long after the we have I have a
dream speech
you have King
with LBJ exalting in the passage of
civil rights legislation well what's
that but an attempt to impose one's will
in regard to this vexing question my
point is it's just a false dichotomy all
the people I mentioned there were
motivated by religion if you doubt me on
Lincoln look at the second inaugural
where he puts the Civil War very much in
a religious framework and all of them
getting involved in the lively public
conversation were indeed trying directly
or indirectly to impose their will on
the rest of the country my point is in
the American vision by John F Kennedy
none of that would be allowed that's why
it's to me it's a red herring you know
religious people ought to be imposing
their will look in the lively public
conversation which is America everyone
is trying to do that whether you're on a
TV talk show whether you're in the halls
of Congress whether you're in a state
legislature whether you're giving a
persuasive public speech you're trying
to impose your will everybody is fine
that's the way the system works what I
resent them is the implication that
religious people quad religious simply
aren't allowed in that conversation
their point of view has to become
something like a hobby that's to say a
privatized opinion I mean I would never
endeavor to say you know to the whole
country
you have to become a devotee of bridge
let's say you're a devil to a bridge
good you and your friends get together
and play bridge you never you never try
to impose that because of private hobby
well what's happened seeing the kind of
Sebelius JFK vision is religion has been
reduced to level of a hobby well tell
that to William Lloyd Garrison John
Brown Abraham Lincoln or Martin Luther
King scene I want their tribe to
increase I want religion to have that
same range and persuasive power in the
public square
[Music]