Pope Francis supports actual exercise of religious liberty
Pope Francis often has a roundabout, "chatty" way of expressing Universal Truth, but he was pretty direct about conscientious objectors like Kim Davis. Excerpt:
"I can't have in mind all cases that can exist about conscientious objection,” Pope Francis told journalists on his flight, “but, yes, I can say that conscientious objection is a right that is a part of every human right."
"And if someone does not allow others to be a conscientious objector,” the Holy Father said, “he denies a right."
The pope also said conscientious objection must be respected in legal structures.
"Otherwise we would end up in a situation where we select what is a right, saying: 'This right has merit, this one does not,'" he stated.
The unambiguous comments from Pope Francis in support of religious freedom come after other comparable statements he made, spoken and symbolic, throughout his historic visit to the United States, making religious liberty a recurring theme for the trip.
It would seem like the Pope believes, as do all of us in the whole 1st Amendment crowd, that you actually have to exercise your religious freedoms the way you exercise your muscles to keep them from atrophying. And it would seem that conscientious objections to bad laws would strengthen the case for religious liberty, not weaken it. It's in line with the whole St. James "screw faith without works" thing.
UPDATE: When I posted this yesterday I was thinking about Dreher's contempt for Kim Davis. But I wasn't thinking about the Benedict Option. Silly me; I forget about the principle of material equivalence. Rod Dreher is the Benedict Option, or BenOp, or Benny, or Strategic Withdrawal, or "Pull and Pray"... at this point in his life at least. I was also thinking about Michael Medved who said a lot of similar things about Davis on his radio show. Medved has a masterful mind and I usually agree with him, but I was not swayed on this point. Maybe Kim Davis isn't the best spokesperson for religious liberty, but this is a time in history to take a stand poorly rather than withdrawing or doing nothing.
Keith's posted comment showing Dreher's use of the photoshopped face of Pope Francis incenses me. And so that is why I feel compelled to make this update. I have lost friends over my refusal to attack the Pope over his deficiencies, real or perceived. Rod Dreher is NOT A CATHOLIC ANYMORE and therefore feels like he has the freedom to say whatever he wants about the leader of another religion. Oh, yeah—if it happens to be the Roman Catholic religion. But my guess is that he has borrowed this image from others with an opposite opinion from his, i.e., people who think it is great that Pope Francis is more lax, less rigid than his predecessors and aligned with mercy rather than justice. At the same time these people tip their hand on what they really think about the Office of the Papacy, the Vicar of Christ, by painting his face like a clown to get their message across, and that is what Rod Dreher and those on the opposite side have in common: contempt for the Catholic Church and her mission in and to the world.
A lot of people do not realize that a week before Rod Dreher penned his famous 2013 Time article "I'm Still Not Going Back to the Catholic Church" he wrote this article in the NY Times titled "The Pope Did More Damage Than He Realized". Taken together, these articles give the impression of a Goldilocks personality who doesn't even care for the baby bear's bed, chair or porridge. His position can be stated "I completely disagree with the Pope's position, he is damaging the church even worse than it was when I left it, he's proving my point about the general unseriousness of Catholics especially in America, he is empowering the dissidents, but I'm still not going back to the Catholic Church." Oh, well to be honest we sort of didn't think you would, Rod, after the article you wrote a week earlier.
So Rod Dreher is all for taking a stand... but not like Kim Davis, God forbid! He stands up and points a finger at her and cries "Who is she to judge!?" He is all for judging himself, and he damn sure wants a father figure who presages Almighty God at the final judgment. But everyone else can just shut the hell up.
If we are entirely confused at this point about how exactly Rod Dreher wants Christians to behave then it is Rod Dreher's fault. And this is nothing new. In his confusing world, we have seen over and over again conflicting images. We've seen a story where an Orthodox Priest reports jubilantly that Rod Dreher has left the Catholic Church and become Russian Orthodox, followed by an angry Rod Dreher lashing out at the messenger in the case, my friend J-Carp, a Citizen-Journalist, for revealing something he was supposedly proud of and yet hiding it under a bushel basket. We've seen him now constantly playing the part of a little, misunderstood Alfred Prufrock when people sensibly and persistently point out that the Benedict Option sounds an awful lot like the refusal to be "salt and light" in the world. And throughout all of this there runs a current of anti-Catholicism of Rod Dreher. The fact that his anti-Catholicism is more intellectual than that of Jack Chick makes it no less real. And no less disgusting.
And the fact that this update is long enough to be its own post... well, it probably means it will be its own post when I have a little more time.
This flies in the face of that whole Benedict Option religious liberty strategy.
ReplyDeletePope Francis must not realize how appearances matter outside that whole Catholic thing bubble, where "thickening" is being touted as the new liberty.
Dreher tries to square the circle and drag Pope Francis under the BO-religious-liberty-strategy tent, by asserting that no, he wouldn't have supported Kim Davis:
ReplyDeleteMy point simply is that it’s a real stretch to say “Pope Francis backs Kim Davis” based on his general comments in the press conference, as reported by Reuters, especially given his caveat about particulars. It is quite possible — I would say desirable — to provide for conscientious objection for many American dissenters, while still believing that government employees and elected officials have a many fewer grounds for standing on conscientious objector status, and still being allowed to keep their jobs. This would satisfy Francis’s belief that conscientious objection should be respected in legal structures, but would nuance it to fit the quotidian practicalities of governing a pluralistic country.
But then, of course, Dreher got a copy of the transcript of the Pope's remarks, and had to go the full Clinton doublespeak route:
Burk is right not to claim that Francis would have supported Davis fully, but it is hard to deny that the pope would have supported some compromise that would have allowed Davis to keep her job while still making it possible for gay couples to exercise their right to obtain a marriage license. Not, of course, that Francis would support gay marriage, but notice that Francis said, “if we want to make peace we have to respect all rights.” Do we want to keep the peace in this time of cultural transition? Francis does. We could all learn from him.
Notice the sleight of hand in which Dreher turns the Obergefell SSM decision into a "right", implying that it is a "human right" just like the one to conscientious objection that Francis is talking about. Which of course it is not, nor would any sentient being think that Francis would believe it to be a human, natural law, right.
But never mind that. Dreher thinks Pope Francis would cave on Kim Davis "in order to keep the peace in this time of cultural transition". I guess you could think that, as long as you are willing to ignore what he said. To wit:
Terry Moran, ABC News:
Would that include government officials as well?
Pope Francis:
It is a human right and if a government official is a human person, he has that right. It is a human right.
To quote Clinton himself, "You gotta do what you gotta do." In this case, to make the facts fit the narrative.
Your BO Whine O' the Week:
Delete[NFR: How many times do I have to tell you that when I begin writing the book, I am going to visit various communities around the country to see what they’re doing and what we can all learn from them? You are griping that I haven’t written a book for which I don’t even have a contract yet! — RD]
As one can see from the link, the commenter, Prof. Woland, isn't griping that Rod hasn't written a book (what, you expected Dreher not to lie, even in the face of evidence to the contrary?). Instead, he's griping that Rod doesn't yet have have anything much in the way of actual content to fill his BO rhetoric:
...this “thicker community” isn’t going to work unless you start making it concrete. You have a very fuzzy vision still. Start making it specific.
No non-catholic kids in catholic schools was a nice concrete example–and it’s good because it then can raise the issue of consequences–and they’re not always going to be good.
For example–while the catholic schools would be more “catholic” and thicker–there’d also be fewer students–and thus probably fewer catholic schools–or none for many catholic communities when they fail in places.
Is this an acceptable consequence?
Curious that the only concrete example of the BO that Dreher's been able to advance so far is derived from Catholicism. Rod's own life apparently contains no such concrete BO examples.
BTW, BO watchers and publishers seeking a tax writeoff alike, Rod has just outlined the planned architecture of his hoped for BO book: it will be exactly like the similarly astroturfed concept Crunchy Cons book. Rod will tour whomever will have him, throw their disparate comments in a blender with a small bass fish and his own hasty, last-minute book gleanings, and the resulting puree will be The Benedict Option.
I saw the "concrete" thickening example of no non-Catholic kids in Catholic schools. This of course would not result in any "thickening" whatsoever, would it? But of course it sounds like it would to those unfamiliar with Catholic schools, so by definition it fits the Dreher BO in that it sounds good but means nothing.
DeleteP.S. Having non-Catholic students in Catholic schools is of course part of the reason for having Catholic schools. As the old saying goes: "We don't do it because they're Catholic, we do it because we're Catholic."
Dreher's spin job on Francis and Kim Davis just got a lot harder. Pope Francis met secretly with Kim Davis while in DC.
DeleteIt's hard to believe someone who uses this photoshopped image of Francis to illustrate his post wants to portray the Pope and probably Catholicism itself with anything but mockery and contempt.
DeleteThis is what Dreher said"NFR: Pope Francis is a “fire-breathing culture warrior”? Honestly, listen to yourself. As you know, I’m not Pope Francis’s biggest fan, but that you would use such words to describe this pope says much more about you than it does Francis. — RD]
DeleteI posted an update after I saw Keith's comment, but before I saw Jonathan's.
DeleteJonathan, I dedicate my update to you, my friend.
Now, y'all aren't playing nice here!! You're using logic, real theologians, and facts. Where's the emotion? Where is the existential angst that can only be expressed by someone who has truly experienced that deprivation of human rights such as what our "Workin' boy" has experienced? Where is the irrationality that naturally bubbles up from someone who is playing it by ear and not troubled by history, facts, theology, or any of those other difficult things you keep tossing in the way?
ReplyDeleteY'all are no fun at all. Next thing you know you'll start bad-mouthing Birkenstocks and micro-brew!!
The Other Anonymous
LOL.
DeleteI suppose one can understand this as the Chitlin Circuit for down list Christian writers:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.baylor.edu/research/calendar/?cal=view&eid=99492
http://www.baylor.edu/research/calendar/?cal=view&eid=95894
Not Ahmed's world tour, to be sure, but it will have to do.
Dreher chatting up the New Republic:
ReplyDeleteRod Dreher, a popular Christian conservative commentator best known for Crunchy Cons, a book about environmentally minded social conservatives, told me by phone during the [Values Voter] conference that he agrees that “the Kim Davis thing was such an enormous distraction—a waste of time and our rapidly diminishing political capital for a battle that we weren’t going to win.” Efforts to carve out accommodations for individual businesses that don’t want LGBT customers—another much-cheered talking point for activists at the summit—are similarly doomed, he believes. But there, Dreher parts with Douthat, and with the political activists who came to Washington over the weekend: He’s among those calling for evangelicals to admit defeat in the culture wars and choose the “Benedict Option,” focusing on strengthening one's own faith, family, and community, rather than continuing to fight unwinnable battles in the political arena.
If this is "a battle that we weren't going to win", then who cares whether "the Kim Davis thing" was "a waste of time and our rapidly diminishing political capital"? What nonsense.
DeleteThis is yet more evidence that the BO is a fictitious house built on a foundation of sand.
The paradigm of the Benedict Option is Rod's blog, an alternate universe secured and sustained by the patronage of others, only semi-connected to the real world through tendrils he completely controls, where pariahs are regularly fed to the trained seals as cover for his own passive-aggression against a Church and world which failed him.
DeleteFor example, here is Catholic rejectnik Rod Dreher cutting loose a liberal Catholic woman, kag18982, while feeding her to the seals
[NFR: I think we’ve reached the end of the road with your participation on this blog, KAG. Good luck in your quest to find a husband, and may you locate a pope who will help you in that quest, unlike this clearly failed Argentine despot. Meanwhile… — RD
The seals enjoy that, mocking her as "hag", etc. As long as Dreher is in a Safe Space - like his blog or his own BO - his masculine dominance over women remains unchallenged. If one looks back at the pictures from his father's death, one gets the sense that his own woman is in it now only for the groceries, and plenty of them.
We most recently learn that Rod himself may be risking raising three new little Libby Annes:
...Their friends can come to our house to spend the night, but we aren’t about to let our kids go anywhere else.”
“That’s interesting,” I said. “My wife and I have had the same policy since our kids were small, and I was writing about the Catholic sex abuse scandal as a journalist.”
Not my place to tell anyone how to raise their kids, but subliminally telling them every other adult may be a child molester just doesn't sound like a sound way to instill self-updating, maturing judgement in a youngster. To the contrary, to me at least it smacks of selfish laziness.
Meanwhile, following the subliminal Francis-as-clown image previously commented on, the latest post, using a linked reference as cover to field the post title "The Chaotic Pope Francis", takes another opportunity to show Francis blowing a kiss - or effecting the moue of a naughty schoolgirl just told a secret; you decide.
But back to my main point in short, the BO is Rod Dreher's last, best revenge upon the world.
If Rod really is "best known for ... a book about environmentally minded social conservatives," then maybe we are overly worried about what he does.
DeleteI dunno. The women who run two popular, influential evangelical discernment blogs I follow are fawning all over Rod right now because he called out Doug Wilson for aiding and abetting pedophiles. If only they knew how self-servingly selective his indignation is! I would love to let them know, but I am way too busy these days. Maybe someone else can let them know about Rod's support for the pedo-enabling Abp Dmitri and Met Jonah, not to mention his weak, attenuated response to the Blanco mess ("I was blessed...we all need mercy." Yeah, right. Unless we are Catholic. What a difference a beard makes!)
DeleteThere is something at the same time horrifying and fascinating about Rod Dreher's life long compulsive human tail sniffing. He's like the human version of one of those apocryphal tiny parasitic Amazonian catfish who follow a trail of urine molecules through the water until they finally swim up one's urethra, set their barbs, and begin their blood sucking.
DeleteIf a human being has sex, you can bet Rod will be on the case.
Rod cannot stand the fact that our pope is loved and celebrated all over the world and wildly popular here in America as shown by the recent visit -- while his obscure hierarchs would not be recognized by a single soul, even if they wore a Bishop Gandalf sandwich board while swinging from the New Year's ball at Times Square.
ReplyDeleteAnd I am not saying worldly popularity is an unmixed blessing. But let's face it, it sure does matter to Rod. I'm sure he is squirming with jealous rage as he lashes out with despicable personal insults and lobs potshots at "Argentine despots." (Yeah, as opposed to Russian ones who used to be KGB agents? Lol!)
DeleteEric Enlow at the Redeeming Law Blog:
ReplyDeleteDreher recently lost control of his personal contempt for Davis, calling her a "jailed hillbilly egotist." See his twitter below. Taken in by a poorly spelled hoax, Dreher thought he was denouncing this Davis "hillbilly" for the "arrogance" of comparing her imprisonment for conscience to the imprisonment of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and asking for prayers for herself like Jesus Christ before his crucifixion.
So deceived, after beginning with a measured, "this is insane," Dreher concluded: "This dingbat thinks she's an Appalachian Joan of Arc but she's just the ego-tripping leading lady in a Jerry Springer Passion Play." [After I wrote this, Dreher deleted these self-condemning lines from his blog. The link is to google's cache.]