This week's Catholic Standard (March 3, 2011 Page 5)contains his weekly column entitled: Speaking Up. (I wonder if I am the only person, other than the Communications Office, who reads it.)
In it, he discusses the fact that Catholics need to speak up. Not simply the hierarchy, but everyday Catholics.
I can agree with that.
But, his column begins to go south in the last paragraph.
First, he states: "From time to time, some Catholics do speak out in disagreement..but sometimes when dealing with care for the poor, protection of human life, or the treatment of immigrants."
Now, I can only image what he is talking about, since he is not specific. Does he mean the discussion on how to help the poor (government solutions vs. non-government solutions)? Does he mean support for the death penalty? Does he mean that illegal aliens should be deported and not given benefits?
I don't know. Do you?
Second, he states that "I need to do a better job of teaching" when there are some Catholics who do not fully understand or accept Catholic teaching.
I think that this is correct but up to a point.
You see teaching is only a part of the equation. When one is a member of an organization, and outwardly refuses to accept the teaching (rules, obligations, etc.) of that organization, teaching may not be the solution.
It may be time for the teacher (organization) to say to the member, that if you are not going to follow the obligations, rules, policies/procedures of the organization, then maybe you cannot/should not be a full member. Therefore, you will be denied these privileges, which are only open to full membership. If you decide once again follow the rules, then all is open to you.
For whatever reason, it seems that we have a teacher who simply refuses to use all of the methods available.
No wonder why many "catholycs" continue to support gay marriage, abortion, living together w/o marriage. They know the rules but since there is no penalty (at least on earth), why should they change.