Nbadan
10-22-2004, 03:05 AM
By William Jeakle
Special to The Times
In the past few weeks, American Catholics have become a divided community, as bishops all over the country sent missives instructing parishioners on the moral code for voting in the presidential election. The subtle and not-so-subtle subtext of their message was that a vote for the Catholic candidate, John Kerry, was a vote against the church. We have come a long way since John Kennedy, a Catholic, ran and won with tacit church support.
I am a Catholic, and I admire Kerry's Catholicism. Like many American Catholics, Kerry doesn't seem to wear his religion on his sleeve. A politician who has been accused of blatant pandering by his born-again opponent, Kerry prefers to keep his strong faith quiet. He sees it as a personal matter. This is hardly a pander, and probably a political liability. Increasingly, I find it one of his great strengths.
The separation of church and state may be the most important founding precept of America. Adhering to this precept, in name and spirit, should be one of the first requirements when we seek a leader. A leader who fails to follow such an important constitutional foundation can certainly be expected to disregard his own promises.
American Catholics have long dealt with the challenge of keeping faith private while participating in public life. Kennedy, the nation's only Catholic president, addressed the issue in a moving speech to Southern Baptists in September 1960. His quotes still resonate with power today.
He told them: "I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute. I believe in a president whose views on religion are his own private affair, neither imposed upon him by the nation or imposed by the nation upon him as a condition to holding that office."
He even pointed to the "statement of the American bishops in 1948 which strongly endorsed church-state separation."
Those were the days.
Now, at a time when evangelical politicians increasingly bring religion into their political rhetoric, we are lumbering toward a crossroads. There is profound irony that those who support "moral need" for the Ten Commandments in school, consistently viewed as a violation of the Constitution, also support increased use of the death penalty, preemptive war and policies that result in increased separation between the rich and poor of this nation.
These issues have been argued for generations, and will likely be argued for generations more.
I am a Catholic, but I am also an American. Like most Americans, I treasure my independence. I value free will. The American bishops have done themselves a powerful disservice by casting stones at a time when their own glass cathedral exposes so many transgressions. American Catholics are a faithful and forgiving lot. But this hierarchical foray into temporal politics is a serious misjudgment, and wrong.
To many Catholics, even those who oppose abortion, Kerry represents the clear moral choice. Having been to war, Kerry appears to understand the tragedy and chaos of the battlefield far more than our current president. Though he is a rich man, he brings many of the teachings of the church to his day-to-day messaging — believing in the morality of adequate health care, jobs, America's role in the world, and a sense of purpose for its young people.
And on the divisive issue of choice, Kerry's position is far more considered than his opponent's, far more likely to move the nation toward greater respect for life, far more realistic. I, like many American Catholics, believe that Kerry's opponent uses the issue of choice cynically, as an opportunity to divide Americans who would otherwise focus on his own disappointing record.
Compassion and nuance are blue-state words, but as the election cycle winds down, as the political winds buffet the candidates' positions, I believe Kerry is far less political in his beliefs and actions. He windsurfs and the pundits guffaw. He serves in Vietnam, and the non-serving power elite discredits. He attends Mass, and the non-church-going moralists question his morality. The bishops wish to focus the attention on a single issue that they, celibate men all, have little credibility to judge.
I admire the steadfast faith of the pope. And I believe in the ability of the Catholic Church to engender faith and make life better for communities. But I believe that a woman's right to choose should remain neither Caesar's nor the prelates', but her own, and God's.
I believe profoundly in the Constitution of the United States, and I support a president who will uphold it as his primary duty. Kerry believes the same, and for that reason, and a host of others, he will get my vote and those of millions of other like-minded American Catholics.
Seattle Times (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2002068378_jeakle21.html)
Special to The Times
In the past few weeks, American Catholics have become a divided community, as bishops all over the country sent missives instructing parishioners on the moral code for voting in the presidential election. The subtle and not-so-subtle subtext of their message was that a vote for the Catholic candidate, John Kerry, was a vote against the church. We have come a long way since John Kennedy, a Catholic, ran and won with tacit church support.
I am a Catholic, and I admire Kerry's Catholicism. Like many American Catholics, Kerry doesn't seem to wear his religion on his sleeve. A politician who has been accused of blatant pandering by his born-again opponent, Kerry prefers to keep his strong faith quiet. He sees it as a personal matter. This is hardly a pander, and probably a political liability. Increasingly, I find it one of his great strengths.
The separation of church and state may be the most important founding precept of America. Adhering to this precept, in name and spirit, should be one of the first requirements when we seek a leader. A leader who fails to follow such an important constitutional foundation can certainly be expected to disregard his own promises.
American Catholics have long dealt with the challenge of keeping faith private while participating in public life. Kennedy, the nation's only Catholic president, addressed the issue in a moving speech to Southern Baptists in September 1960. His quotes still resonate with power today.
He told them: "I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute. I believe in a president whose views on religion are his own private affair, neither imposed upon him by the nation or imposed by the nation upon him as a condition to holding that office."
He even pointed to the "statement of the American bishops in 1948 which strongly endorsed church-state separation."
Those were the days.
Now, at a time when evangelical politicians increasingly bring religion into their political rhetoric, we are lumbering toward a crossroads. There is profound irony that those who support "moral need" for the Ten Commandments in school, consistently viewed as a violation of the Constitution, also support increased use of the death penalty, preemptive war and policies that result in increased separation between the rich and poor of this nation.
These issues have been argued for generations, and will likely be argued for generations more.
I am a Catholic, but I am also an American. Like most Americans, I treasure my independence. I value free will. The American bishops have done themselves a powerful disservice by casting stones at a time when their own glass cathedral exposes so many transgressions. American Catholics are a faithful and forgiving lot. But this hierarchical foray into temporal politics is a serious misjudgment, and wrong.
To many Catholics, even those who oppose abortion, Kerry represents the clear moral choice. Having been to war, Kerry appears to understand the tragedy and chaos of the battlefield far more than our current president. Though he is a rich man, he brings many of the teachings of the church to his day-to-day messaging — believing in the morality of adequate health care, jobs, America's role in the world, and a sense of purpose for its young people.
And on the divisive issue of choice, Kerry's position is far more considered than his opponent's, far more likely to move the nation toward greater respect for life, far more realistic. I, like many American Catholics, believe that Kerry's opponent uses the issue of choice cynically, as an opportunity to divide Americans who would otherwise focus on his own disappointing record.
Compassion and nuance are blue-state words, but as the election cycle winds down, as the political winds buffet the candidates' positions, I believe Kerry is far less political in his beliefs and actions. He windsurfs and the pundits guffaw. He serves in Vietnam, and the non-serving power elite discredits. He attends Mass, and the non-church-going moralists question his morality. The bishops wish to focus the attention on a single issue that they, celibate men all, have little credibility to judge.
I admire the steadfast faith of the pope. And I believe in the ability of the Catholic Church to engender faith and make life better for communities. But I believe that a woman's right to choose should remain neither Caesar's nor the prelates', but her own, and God's.
I believe profoundly in the Constitution of the United States, and I support a president who will uphold it as his primary duty. Kerry believes the same, and for that reason, and a host of others, he will get my vote and those of millions of other like-minded American Catholics.
Seattle Times (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2002068378_jeakle21.html)