Of all the movies I’ve ever watched in my life, ‘Going My Way‘ may be the single most influential for me.
If you’ve never seen it (and please, please tell me that you have), it was made back in 1944 and told of a young priest (Bing Crosby) who’s brought in to help save an ailing parish and its elderly pastor (Barry Fitzgerald). That year it was the highest-grossing picture, was nominated for ten Academy Awards, and won seven…including Best Picture.
Wow, how times have changed.
Today this film is often rejected for being too schmaltzy, and certainly too “pro”-Catholic Church. Of course, when compared to the way the Church is portrayed in cinema and on TV these days, I guess that last criticism must be true. Think about it: it actually shows priests tending to their community, telling jokes and being all-around decent human beings.
UPDATE – June 19, 2014: ***(Spoke with a co-worker of mine yesterday, and immediately thought of this old post…)***
Had a conversation recently with a dear friend of mine about the existence of God.
To make it simple: I believe, he doesn’t.
We’ve had several (okay, more than several) conversations about God, religion, creation, etc., over the years, and we’ve thus far continued to agree to disagree. These conversations are always couched with respect, in part because we’re good friends. As an interesting side note, you should also know that we’re relatively in-sync with many of our ‘big’ beliefs, …save this one.
We’ve already done our breakdown on last week’s VP debate; 2 posts, in fact. However, there is still one aspect of that evening which bothered me greatly but I didn’t get into, since (A) I knew it would take way too long to address properly, and (B) the subject makes my skull hurt.
The part to which I refer is in the following clip. Jump to the 2:53 mark to hear Biden’s remark (text is below):
“My religion defines who I am, and I have been a practicing Catholic my whole life,” Biden said. “And it has particularly informed my social doctrine. Catholic social doctrine talks about taking care of those who can’t take care of themselves, people who need help.
“With regard to abortion,” he said, “I accept my church’s position on abortion as a, what we call de fide doctrine. Life begins at conception. That’s the church’s judgment. I accept it in my personal life. But I refuse to impose it on equally devout Christian and Muslims and Jews, and I just refuse to impose that on others, unlike my friend here, the congressman.
“I do not believe that we have a right to tell other people that, women, that they can’t control their body,” said Biden. “It is a decision between them and their doctor, in my view, and the Supreme Court. I am not going to interfere with that.”
Oy, vey….
To use Biden’s favorite phrase from the other night (he said it twice): that’s a bunch of malarkey.
First of all, Twitter went insane about 5 seconds later:
Be real: if your faith “defines” who you are, then how exactly does it not color how you go about your day-to-day activities? I’m well aware that the act of deliberately failing to live one’s faith is popularly described in society today as being able to ‘compartmentalize’ your religious values.
Yeah, I’m calling ‘malarkey’ on that one, too.
If your faith, your belief system, defines who you are, then it necessarily defines what you do & how you do it. Otherwise, your alleged faith is nothing more than a hobby, like model building. Or, in Joe’s case, having his fake teeth whitened.
—–
After forcing myself to watch the debate a second time, I observed that Biden chose his words just a tad too carefully. Listen to his verbiage: his answer doesn’t include the word “belief”, nor does he state that he agrees with the Catholic Church’s view. He simply says he “accepts” it, which is barely more than a grudging acknowledgment.
Someone can accept any number of things:
Convicts accept that they’re in prison; I’m guessing very few of them feel they should be.
I accept that the speed limit on the Interstate near my home is 55 mph, rather than the 70+ at which most people regularly drive. That doesn’t mean that I agree with the posted speed limit, and I certainly wouldn’t advocate to keepit that way.
In my opinion, Biden is an example of the classic ‘cafeteria’ Catholic: “I’m cool with some of the stuff the Church says, but not real hip with some other stuff, so I’ll just order from the doctrinal à la carte menu, and take only what I want“. Sorry, kids, Catholicism doesn’t work that way.
This isn’t some minor, inconsequential church belief, either: this is one of the big ones, falling under that “Thou shall not Kill” suggestion commandment. Even Joe may have heard mention of it over the years, …assuming he wasn’t too busy smirking, laughing, and interrupting the priest.
—–
Biden also must have been too occupied with Catholicism defining his life to have heard this statement from Pope John Paul II:
“Disregard for the right to life, precisely because it leads to the killing of the person whom society exists to serve, is what most directly conflicts with the possibility of achieving the common good,” the pope said. “Consequently, a civil law authorizing abortion or euthanasia ceases by that very fact to be a true, morally binding civil law.
“Abortion and euthanasia are thus crimes which no human law can claim to legitimize,” said the pope. “There is no obligation in conscience to obey such laws; instead there is a grave and clear obligation to oppose them by conscientious objection.”
“In the case of an intrinsically unjust law, such as a law permitting abortion or euthanasia, it is therefore never licit to obey it, or to ‘take part in a propaganda campaign in favour of such a law, or vote for it,'” declared the pope.
–from Pope John Paul II in his 1995 encyclical letter,Evangelium Vitae.
Pope Benedict XVI, back in 2002 when he was still a Cardinal, also wrote of this, saying:
“Catholics, (…) have the right and the duty to recall society to a deeper understanding of human life and to the responsibility of everyone in this regard,” Cardinal Ratzinger wrote. “John Paul II, continuing the constant teaching of the Church, has reiterated many times that those who are directly involved in lawmaking bodies have a “grave and clear obligation to oppose“any law that attacks human life. For them, as for every Catholic, it is impossible to promote such laws or to vote for them.”
I know Biden doesn’t exactly light up the heavens with his intellect, but that seems fairly clear, even to a simpleton like me.
—–
The other big Catholic whopper that St. Biden The Pious was selling last week was regarding the HHS mandate. We’ve covered (along with a host of other folks) the Obamacare contraception vs. religious freedom law ad nauseam, but Biden lied about it anyway.
“With regard to the assault on the Catholic Church, let me make it absolutely clear. No religious institution—Catholic or otherwise, including Catholic social services, Georgetown hospital, Mercy hospital, any hospital—none has to either refer contraception, none has to pay for contraception, none has to be a vehicle to get contraception in any insurance policy they provide.
That is a fact. That, is a fact.”
Actually, Joe, it’s kinda the opposite of a fact. In reality it’s a non-fact, or what I like to call: a lie. Honestly, I do love it when Biden speaks that way to make an I’m-really-serious rhetorical point. His voice slows…down…and he repeats things….twice….for …effect.
It tells me when he’s lying.
It tells me…..when…. he’s….. lying.
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) came out with a statement last week to refute this “fact” in no uncertain terms, part of which is below:
The HHS mandate contains a narrow, four-part exemption for certain “religious employers.” That exemption was made final in February and does not extend to “Catholic social services, Georgetown hospital, Mercy hospital, any hospital,” or any other religious charity that offers its services to all, regardless of the faith of those served.
HHS has proposed an additional “accommodation” for religious organizations like these, which HHS itself describes as “non-exempt.” That proposal does not even potentially relieve these organizations from the obligation “to pay for contraception” and “to be a vehicle to get contraception.” They will have to serve as a vehicle, because they will still be forced to provide their employees with health coverage, and that coverage will still have to include sterilization, contraception, and abortifacients. They will have to pay for these things, because the premiums that the organizations (and their employees) are required to pay will still be applied, along with other funds, to cover the cost of these drugs and surgeries.
USCCB continues to urge HHS, in the strongest possible terms, actually to eliminate the various infringements on religious freedom imposed by the mandate.
Again, that seems to be pretty easy to understand. Maybe we need to translate it into a picture book for Vice President My-Faith-Defines-Me.
I’ll give Biden this much: he’s in good company, as a plethora of Democrat politicians use the same convoluted, rationalized logic, including John Kerry and Nancy “I haven’t blinked in 20 years” Pelosi:
—–
Honestly, I couldn’t begin to care if Biden is Catholic, atheist, Muslim, Jewish, Wiccan, or if he pays homage to snails. I do, however, care a great deal when the Vice President in effect slanders my faith, repeatedly trying to pass off his idiotic blather as “fact”.
More to the point, if someone believes that abortion is fine-&-dandy, let’s have that discussion. Within my close circle of family/friends are people who disagree with me wholeheartedly on this subject. None of them, however, have the chutzpah to try passing themselves off as devout followers of any faith where they are 100% opposedto a belief so integral to that same church’s teachings.
Believe what you want; it’s a free country…for now. But for it to remain so, this pathetic excuse for a VP, along with his equally truth-challenged sidekick, need to be gone next month.
ADDENDUM from Godsbooklover for our non-Catholic readers: Of course you already know this, but it bears pointing out that the issue of abortion is NOT merely a “Catholic” issue, but one which should matter to all Christians, and all Jews. JTR mentioned that’s it’s a “Big One”…as in, one of the Big Ten, which are most certainly notsuggestions.
The head of the Catholic hospitals trade group reversed her support for the Obama administration’s proposed compromise on a controversial requirement that employers cover contraception in workers’ health plans. SisterCarol Keehan, head of the Catholic Health Association, was the most high-profile Catholic to speak in support of President Barack Obama‘s February announcement that the federal government would allow religious employers that object to the use of birth control to turn over responsibility for covering it for their workers to insurance companies.
In a formal submission to federal regulators, Sister Keehan wrote that the Catholic hospitals group had decided all of the options being discussed were “unduly cumbersome and would be unlikely to adequately meet the religious liberty concerns of all of our members and other Church ministries.”
I confess I didn’t pay enough attention to this whole issue when it was fresh. So I went back and read President Obama’s announcement, and I can see why Sister Keehan initially approved. She was probably sucked in momentarily by the affable, gracious-sounding rhetoric, just as I was: “I know how important the work that faith-based organizations do (sic) and how much impact they can have in their communities,” the President averred.
After “explaining” what the compromise would entail, he reiterated (twice):
“The result will be that religious organizations won’t have to pay for these services, and no religious institution will have to provide these services directly. Let me repeat: These employers will not have to pay for, or provide, contraceptive services. But women who work at these institutions will have access to free contraceptive services, just like other women, and they’ll no longer have to pay hundreds of dollars a year that could go towards paying the rent or buying groceries.”
Now I don’t have the most brilliant business mind, but that sounds like some pretty fancy footwork to me. Justturnright thought so several weeks ago:
Further, the argument that “the coverage will be provided for free” is specious and outright laughable. Even the LA Times called such statements “magical thinking” back in February.
It stands to reason: the insurance company is not Grandpa Gus, paying your bill out of the kindness of its corporate heart. That money is coming from somewhere. Typically it comes from premiums, whether the employer is paying them, the employee is paying them, or they’re sharing the cost. If neither the employer nor the employee is required to pay anything for a particular service, then–golly gee whillikers, do you really think the insurance company is going to fork it over out of its profits? Do you still get quarters from the Tooth Fairy?
Obviously, the insurance companies will be passing those costs along. Now, do you think they’ll be carefully raising the premiums of only non-objecting, nonreligious employers? Good heavens, that sounds like discrimination! No, I suspect what cleverer people figured out a long time ago, that everyone’s premiums will go up in order to pay for this cockamamie government scheme.
And for that reason–among others–Sister Keehan has wisely washed her hands of any involvement with such a dubious compromise.
This is timely, as the bishops have organized a “Fortnight for Freedom,” which begins tomorrow, June 21st.
Culminating on Independence Day, this special period of prayer, study, catechesis, and public action will emphasize both our Christian and American heritage of liberty. Dioceses and parishes around the country have scheduled special events that support a great national campaign of teaching and witness for religious liberty.
This is a crucial period for the Church, and the addition of the hospitals into the fight is a critical blow to Obama’s claim that his compromise was anything of the sort.
(CNSNews.com) – Having organized 43 plaintiffs—including the archdioceses of New York and Washington and the University of Notre Dame—to file 12 different lawsuits against the Obama administration last Monday alleging the administration is violating the religious freedom of Catholics, the Catholic bishops of the United States are now preparing Catholics for what may be the most massive campaign of civil disobedience in this country since the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and early 1960s.
“Some unjust laws impose such injustices on individuals and organizations that disobeying the laws may be justified,” the bishops state in a document developed to be inserted into church bulletins in Catholic parishes around the country in June.
This is timely, as the bishops have organized a 
Two Heads are Better Than One 