Cover image is of Mother Angelica, the founder of EWTN, or the Catholic Channel.
So far, all of the information coming out from the John Podesta emails provided by Wikileaks talked about politics and finding ways to influence public opinion. Now, the cache of information is revealing another target: The Catholic Church.
In an email exchange with a Jew, Sandy Newman, Podesta talks about planting the seeds of a “Catholic Spring” and fomenting revolution against the bishops in order to “Democratize” the Church:
“There needs to be a Catholic Spring, in which Catholics themselves demand the end of a middle ages dictatorship and the beginning of a little democracy and respect for gender equality in the Catholic Church,” Sandy Newman, president and founder of the progressive nonprofit Voices for Progress, writes to Podesta in an email titled “opening for a Catholic Spring? just musing.”…“Even if the idea isn’t crazy, I don’t qualify to be involved and I have not thought at all about how one would ‘plant the seeds of the revolution,’ or who would plant them.”…
“We created Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good to organize for a moment like this. But I think it lacks the leadership to do so now. Likewise Catholics United. Like most Spring movements, I think this one will have to be bottom up,” Podesta writes….
The conversation further reveals the contempt with which radical progressives view Catholics and the Catholic Church.
As if we Catholics didn’t know that. The Church has been attacked by all sides since the first century when a Roman named Simon tried to infiltrate the teachings. It didn’t work then and it’s not going to work now. The Church has never been a democracy, but always a confederation of bishoprics. In 2,000 years, we’ve even had popes worse than Francis, and we survived the worst apostate Cardinal of the twentieth century, even if Francis is trying to breathe life into that man’s dead heretical theology. All revolution at this point will do is get a bunch of people excommunicated for heresy. Public opinion rarely sways the hierarchy – especially on the topic that they were discussing. The Lifezette article quoted above didn’t give the reason for the exchange. Breitbart did:
This whole controversy with the bishops opposing contraceptive coverage even though 98% of Catholic women (and their conjugal partners) have used contraception has me thinking . . .
Mr. Newman shouldn’t think too hard since that number is not accurate. It was debunked some time ago, and includes the abstinence numbers. Not only that, the Church teaching on contraception comes not from the bishops, but is eternal, and the reason why was best explained by Pope Paul VI in 1968 via the encyclical that reinforced the teaching, Humanae Vitae:
Consequences of Artificial Methods
17. Responsible men can become more deeply convinced of the truth of the doctrine laid down by the Church on this issue if they reflect on the consequences of methods and plans for artificial birth control. Let them first consider how easily this course of action could open wide the way for marital infidelity and a general lowering of moral standards. Not much experience is needed to be fully aware of human weakness and to understand that human beings—and especially the young, who are so exposed to temptation—need incentives to keep the moral law, and it is an evil thing to make it easy for them to break that law. Another effect that gives cause for alarm is that a man who grows accustomed to the use of contraceptive methods may forget the reverence due to a woman, and, disregarding her physical and emotional equilibrium, reduce her to being a mere instrument for the satisfaction of his own desires, no longer considering her as his partner whom he should surround with care and affection.
Finally, careful consideration should be given to the danger of this power passing into the hands of those public authorities who care little for the precepts of the moral law. Who will blame a government which in its attempt to resolve the problems affecting an entire country resorts to the same measures as are regarded as lawful by married people in the solution of a particular family difficulty? Who will prevent public authorities from favoring those contraceptive methods which they consider more effective? Should they regard this as necessary, they may even impose their use on everyone. It could well happen, therefore, that when people, either individually or in family or social life, experience the inherent difficulties of the divine law and are determined to avoid them, they may give into the hands of public authorities the power to intervene in the most personal and intimate responsibility of husband and wife.
No matter what one thinks of the Catholic Church or Catholicism, if the bishops were to bend on this – even with the threat on the mission of the Church being made via economic blackmail – then the Church has no moral authority whatsoever. She is not a democracy. She is also not a dictatorship, of the middle ages or any other time period. She is the Church, the oldest institution on earth. And we Catholics know darn well and good that the apostates have been steadily hammering away from inside the faith far more effectively than any “Catholic spring seeds” ever could.
Writer’s note: it is of interest in context that the convents, seminaries, and monestaries getting vocations (new and younger blood) are very much of the traditional mold. The nuns and sisters are habited or wear dresses and veils, the priests and monks more prone to full cassocks and albs. It’s driving the liberals in the Church nuts.