Evangelicals and Catholics Gerry O'Shea
Evangelical Christianity has
a long history as a conservative force in America. In the recent presidential
race more than 80% of evangelicals voted for
Donald Trump.
Until fairly recently they
were suspicious of the Catholic church, viewing it as insufficiently committed
to biblical Christianity. The core
evangelical Protestant belief in the need for each individual to be spiritually
born again as a prerequisite for salvation is not a theme one would hear
addressed from Catholic pulpits.
This conservative religious
tradition, especially strong in Southern states, rarely supported government
programs for the poor, preferring that their needs be met by local charities.
The Catholic tradition from
Pope Leo's Rerum Novarum in 1891 to the pronouncements of the present pope is
very different. A strong commitment to the core guiding principle of the
"common good" is at the center of the social teaching of nearly all
the popes since Leo. The demands of the "common good" ensured church
support for the great government anti-poverty programs of our era: social
security, medicare and medicaid.
The official opposition by the Catholic hierarchy to
Obamacare, which provides healthcare for millions of poor people, was an
unfortunate and shameful aberration from this Catholic tradition.
Since the 1980's the
hostilities, based on class as well as biblical interpretation, between the
powerful White Anglo-Saxon Protestant Establishment (WASPS) and the Catholic
Church in America have abated. The growth of ecumenism played a part, but even
more important was the agreement between these important large culture blocs on
two big divisive national issues:
abortion and gay rights.
According to the most recent
polls, 40% of Americans believe that abortion should be illegal in all or most
cases. More than 70% of evangelicals are in this corner, but, surprisingly,
only 49% of Catholics agree. Overall in the American population 57% support a
woman's right to terminate her pregnancy while 40% disagree. These numbers have
remained steady since the Roe V Wade Supreme Court decision in 1973.
Statistics only tell part of
the story. Strict pro-life Catholics may be in a minority among their co-religionists
but they are fiercely committed to the cause and they have the unequivocal
support of the church leadership.
For the millions of people -
evangelicals and Catholics - who see the present laws as a license to kill
babies, this is a litmus issue. They view the world in Manichean terms with the
good people on their side and the others living in darkness. Yes, for them this
is a God versus Satan situation with no middle ground.
The Democratic Party supports
the Roe decision while the Republican Party describes itself as pro life. Mr.
Trump, who had expressed support for abortion rights a few years ago, ran on a
strictly pro-life platform, promising to appoint only Supreme Court justices
that he hopes will overturn Roe and let each state legislate separately on the
issue.
It is not clear how reversing
the 1973 Supreme Court ruling would lead to less abortions. It is very likely
that women who are refused the procedure in their own place would travel to
some nearby state where it is allowed. This reminds me of the current
prevailing situation in Ireland where, so far, abortion is illegal, but
thousands of Irish women go to England to terminate their pregnancies - surely
a strong whiff of hypocrisy here whether in Ireland now or in states that would
ban abortion if the Supreme Court reverses the Roe decision.
The second issue that brings
these two groups together involves their rejection of the gay lifestyle. The
bible clearly states that "male and female created He them." Messing
with that arrangement is wrong from this perspective and gay marriage, now
legal in all states, and gay parenting are abominations to be condemned at
every turn.
They think of their opponents
as liberals, especially judges and politicians, who are pushing what they view as a corrupt agenda,
destroying the moral fabric of the country they love. Critics wonder why they
only raise their voices as Christians about these two issues while rarely
protesting cuts in programs for the poor.
They might expect that the
pope would be an assured ally, and indeed Benedict and most of his predecessors
would be cheering them on. Francis is
far more nuanced in his pronouncements. Of course, he condemns abortion but
then asks who is he to judge, relying on Christ's non-judgmental example in the
gospels.
He instructs the clergy and
all church workers to draw their inspiration from the saints and sinners in the
pews and on the street struggling to make their way in a very complex and
challenging world. He urges them to leave
their judgment hats at home as they minister to and learn about what the poet
Wordsworth called "the still sad music of humanity."
For evangelicals and their
allies in the Catholic Church gays have to somehow change their same-sex
predisposition or remain celibate to live a Christian life. For them the case
is clear: sexual fulfillment other than in a monogamous heterosexual relationship
is grievously sinful.
Recently, Cardinal Tobin in
Newark, a Francis appointee, invited a crowd of lesbian, gay, bisexual and
transgender Catholics to a celebratory mass in his cathedral. He addressed them
as brothers and sisters and promised that they would always be welcome in his
churches.
Most bishops and certainly
Cardinal Dolan in New York have so far stayed with the old thinking -
homosexual acts are essentially disordered and thus can never be spoken of
other than in terms of perversion. In this belief they are at one with
evangelicals.
Comments
Post a Comment