Phyllis Zagano on Foolishness of Catholics Who Question Bishops' Attack on Obama: A Footnote

A tiny footnote to what I posted earlier today about Phyllis Zagano's recent NCR article (and about all of the centrist Catholic intellectual and media gurus now piling on the Obama administration and politicking for the "pro-life" Republicans vis-a-vis religious freedom and the rights of conscience): 

I stated, 

Teaching does not rely on the tactic of choice of the current regime ruling the church--coercion--if it expects to be effective.  It most certainly does not choose coercion over respectful engagement of varying opinions when what the teacher hopes to impart are moral and spiritual values.  Teaching that expects to be effective in those areas decisively and on principle sets coercion aside and enters the fray of risky conversation with the fellow human beings one hopes to teach--and to learn from.

And after I wrote that earlier today, I'm interested to read the following letter written by Father Michael Tegeder of Minneapolis in the latest issue of the British Catholic journal The Tablet: 

Gagging order on conscience 

In the 14 January issue of The Tablet I noticed a citation of my own Archdiocese, "Archbishop John Nienstedt of St Paul, Minnesota, has issued a "gag order" on priests who disagree with his vocal opposition to same-sex-marriage proposals. "There ought not to be open dissension on this," Archbishop Nienstedt reportedly told priests at a meeting last year. "If any have personal reservations, I do not wish that they be shared publicly." 

Indeed, this statement should get wide circulation for it is quite amazing. In effect, the moral credibility of every priest in the archdiocese is undermined by this command. Parishioners have no reason to know if on a matter of major moral consequence their priests actually agree in conscience with a teaching they are ordered to promote. This is also most unusual as the constitutional amendment is not a matter of church doctrine but rather concerns public policy and personal civil rights. Other bishops, including the English bishops, have shown no such need to impose our Catholic teaching about marriage on other citizens of different faiths or no faith. There are many positive ways that our Church can uphold sacramental marriage.

Keep in mind the ostensible argument (the one centered on that shibboleth phrase in bright and shining lights) being pushed by the U.S. Catholic bishops and their centrist (and right-wing) defenders right now is this: they're fighting for the sacred rights of conscience against attempts to coerce conscience and violate its sacred rights.

Or so they say.

When the very same reverend  gentlemen advancing that argument are doing everything possible to bully, browbeat, and coerce the consciences of Catholics about gay and lesbian human rights in matters and forums secular.  Including the consciences of Catholic priests.

As I argued earlier today, this in itself ought to give the thinking, reasonable, educated centrists who are now lining up behind the bishops in their "religious freedom" crusade pause to think.  If nothing else, it should give them pause to think about precisely what's inside that bright and shining circle of religious freedom that has them so mesmerized.

And so stultified.  (Unless, of course, they agree with the bishops about the human status of their gay and lesbian brothers and sisters as much as they agree with them about contraception and other issues.)

Thanks to the indefatigable reader of Catholic blogs and publications, Jim McCrea--one of the American Catholic church's national treasures--for sending Father Tegeder's letter to me and other readers.  For more on Father Tegeder from this blog (with links to other articles), see here and here.