“Finally, all of you, be of one mind, sympathetic, loving toward one another, compassionate, humble. Do not return evil for evil, or insult for insult; but, on the contrary, a blessing, because to this you were called, that you might inherit a blessing” (1Peter 3:8,9)The Apostle Peter wrote his two letters in the New Testament to the early Christians who, through persecution, had been dispersed throughout Asia Minor.
With this exhortation, and many others sprinkled throughout these inspiring letters, he simply continued the teaching of the Lord Jesus on how those who bear the name Christian should behave toward one another.
There is a way in which we are called to behave with one another which is often different than what characterizes the age or the culture in which we live.
So it is in our own day and in American culture.
The reasons for insisting on this behavior are multiple. Of course, it all affects our own growth in holiness and our continued call to learn to live and love as Christians. However, it also involves our public witness. We bear witness with our lives as to the truths of our faith and those around us look to our behavior with each other.
We are called to manifest the continued presence of the Risen Lord in every age. He, in His Sacred humanity, showed us how to live. I could go on at length on the implications of this, but the point is that no matter what arena we find ourselves in, including political debate, we do not take off our Catholic Christian faith as though it is a cloak we wear only at Mass.
In perhaps one of the most quoted passages of the teachings of the Second Vatican Council, the “Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World” (Gaudium et Spes), the Council Fathers put it this way:
"This council exhorts Christians, as citizens of two cities, to strive to discharge their earthly duties conscientiously and in response to the Gospel spirit. They are mistaken who, knowing that we have here no abiding city but seek one which is to come think that they may therefore shirk their earthly responsibilities. For they are forgetting that by the faith itself they are more obliged than ever to measure up to these duties, each according to his proper vocation.
“Nor, on the contrary, are they any less wide of the mark who think that religion consists in acts of worship alone and in the discharge of certain moral obligations, and who imagine they can plunge themselves into earthly affairs in such a way as to imply that these are altogether divorced from the religious life. This split between the faith which many profess and their daily lives deserves to be counted among the more serious errors of our age."
At the heart of their exhortation from the Council is the same truth proclaimed by the first Pope, St. Peter, in the passage with which I began this editorial.
I have so far written two articles concerning the behavior demonstrated by one group of Catholics engaged in the public policy debate, the leaders of “Catholics United”, against another Catholic engaged in the same arena of Christian participation and faithful citizenship, Deal Hudson.
Of course these parties disagree on some issues of real importance.
That is fine and a robust debate concerning those disagreements could be very helpful. However, it is the manner of that debate which I have tried to address.
In the last article I wrote, entitled “Editorial: The Verbal Lynching of Deal Hudson Must End”, I spent a good deal of time zeroing in on the area which seems to be the reason given by “Catholics United” for a verbal assault on the character of their brother Catholic Christian, that is the issue of Senator Obama’s position on the panorama of issues best bundled under the discussion of the Right to Life from conception to natural death.
In particular, that Deal Hudson used the word “Infanticide” when addressing one of the Democratic Presidential candidate’s views on the practice commonly called “Partial Birth Abortion”.
First, I showed that a deceased but leading and revered member of the Democratic Party leadership, Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan used the phrase initially, and he did so many years ago.
Then, using the candidates own words, I set forth his clear, stated position on the Right to Life vs. the so called “Abortion Right”.
I did that to show that the debate on this question is a very legitimate political discussion and it is appropriate for “Catholics United” and Deal Hudson to debate it in the public square.
However, and this was my point in both of my articles, what should not characterize the debate, between Catholic Christians, is personal character assaults in the nature of detraction.
In this instance, it was the recirculation of a 14 year old incident which has already been acknowledged, repented of and forgiven in the Sacrament of Reconciliation. It simply should not be that way among us.
We live in an age not unlike the one in which the nascent Christian communities developed. That is why St. Peter’s admonition is so apropos. The way in which we treat each other speaks volumes to those who may be considering the claims we make about Jesus Christ and the Church.
Such behavior is not something which should be engaged in period; it cheapens politics and coarsens the culture. It does not help the public debate, and it does little to assist voters in assessing the positions of the candidates in this important election.
However, I write as a Catholic Christian to Catholic Christians. There is a Biblical adage which resounds in addressing this matter, “To those to whom much is given, much more will be required”.
We are first, last and before all else, Catholic Christians. We should live that baptismal vocation in a unity of life and work diligently to avoid the danger warned of by our leaders.
“This split between the faith which many profess and their daily lives deserves to be counted among the more serious errors of our age."
Debate, yes, but do so in a manner which befits the name we bear as Catholic Christians. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Disclaimer
No responsibility or liability shall attach itself to either myself or to the blogspot ‘Clerical Whispers’ for any or all of the articles placed here.
The placing of an article hereupon does not necessarily imply that I agree or accept the contents of the article as being necessarily factual in theology, dogma or otherwise.
Sacerdos