Catholic Neocons Undermine Historic Protestantism

The Rev. Andrew Weaver writes about the Conservative Catholic Influence in the Institue for Religion and Democracy, and its growing influence.  They constitute about a third of the board (about the same proportion of Catholics in the country, I think), but have undermined the general ecumenical work between Catholics and protestants.   What is interesting is how anti-Catholic, also, their theology truly is, especially when it comes to capitalism. 

He writes:  While Father Neuhaus and his Catholic cohorts have built and sustained an organization that has consistently labored to generate suspicion and hostility about mainstream Protestant leaders, not a penny has been spent nor staff member assigned to attempt to change anything about the Catholic Church. This conduct constitutes the single greatest breach in ecumenical good will between Roman Catholics and Protestants since Vatican II.

Weaver quotes a former editor of First Things: The America toward which Richard John Neuhaus wishes to lead us -- [is] an America...in which moral and theological absolutists demonize the country's political institutions and make nonnegotiable public demands under the threat of sacralized revolutionary violence, in which citizens flee from the inner obligations of freedom and long to subordinate themselves to ecclesiastical authority, and in which traditionalist Christianity thoroughly dominates the nation's public life (Linker, 2006).

Is Neuhaus aware that American Idol and Project Runway are more important than church these days, and that young people are simply ignoring adults about sex? 

Weaver concludes:  Imagine the outcry from Catholic leaders, a fully justified response, if a highly influential group of Protestants obtained a million dollars a year from left-wing sources to generate a propaganda campaign against the leadership of the Catholic Church over the issues of the ordination of women and divorce. Moreover, this Protestant-directed group constantly sought to undermine Catholic leaders and missions through twisted and demeaning distortions of what they said, while seeking no reforms in their own communions. This is exactly the situation we have at IRD.

Although I generally think Protestant Christianity has rendered "god-talk" to be redundant, and has not called young leaders of great talent, I do believe that there is a deliberate attempt to destroy the  liberal, magnanimous, social justice tradition that is a crucial part of American culture - via Henry Ward Beecher, Walter Rauschenbushc, Henry Fosdick, William Sloane Coffin among others.  Perhaps protestants were right:  Catholics would undermine the American traditions of sympathy, mutual aid and civil rights. 

Comments

[The young fogey]

I hope you're not advocating the nativism of early-1800s America or the no-popery of Protestants and Other Americans United for Separation of Church and State, the kind that was against JFK because of his nominal church membership (and before that Al Smith).

I don't like the RC neoconnerie either but perhaps for different reasons.

My blog tries to follow the tradition of orthodox RC and Anglo-Catholic workers for peace and justice in the early C20, pre-Vatican II (with a big dose of libertarianism added).

[John wilkins]

I wouldn't advocate any sort of nativism at all. I would say that it is liberal protestants, however, who did begin the work of dialogue and have helped, in practice, restore some of the important practical aspects of the Catholic faith in America. I am, myself, an anglo-catholic.

And I like your blog quite a bit.

[Caelius Spinator]

Nor do I suspect Father Wilkins of promoting the 17th century anti-Popery of Virginians which led them to put swathes of Maryland to fire and sword.

[Art Deco]

All of these benefactors have a common political aim (National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy, 1997), which is to neutralize and overturn the social justice tradition of mainline Protestant churches because they are in tension with unfettered capitalism (Swecker, 2005; Clarkson, 2006).

If that is their object, subsidizing Fr. Neuhaus and Dr. George is decidedly inefficient. Neither man writes much at all on the subject of political economy.

The difficulty with Dr. Linker's critiques is that they presume his audience does not actually read the publication which he was appointed to edit. See these exchanges.

[Art Deco]

at this address.

http://www.theamericanscene.com/archives/2006_03_26_archives.php.

[Art Deco]

Imagine the outcry from Catholic leaders, a fully justified response, if a highly influential group of Protestants obtained a million dollars a year from left-wing sources to generate a propaganda campaign against the leadership of the Catholic Church over the issues of the ordination of women and divorce. Moreover, this Protestant-directed group constantly sought to undermine Catholic leaders and missions through twisted and demeaning distortions of what they said, while seeking no reforms in their own communions. This is exactly the situation we have at IRD.

The organization he imagines is called "Catholics for a Free Choice". It is funded by, among others, the Ford Foundation. Its principal (Frances Kissling) tends to be treated as a figure of fun in the Catholic press.

[Art Deco]

Is Neuhaus aware that American Idol and Project Runway are more important than church these days, and that young people are simply ignoring adults about sex?

It is likely his moral understandings are unaffected by contemporary mass entertainment and consumer preferences. And that is as it should be.

[Art Deco]

Forgive me for suspecting, Mr. Moderator, that the enemy of the mainline protestant leadership is to be seen not in the offices of the IRD but in rather front of them every morning when when they are shaving (or plucking their eyebrows, as the case may be).

[Art Deco]

Bullets in the foot as manifested in the following remark:

Its more important for me to encourage people in their call than to worry about their final state with God.