George on Anti-Catholicism & Evangelicals

Senior editor Robert P. George has a worthwhile post at First Things on anti-catholicism in recent comments about the "Catholic Supreme Court" and evangelicals who have spoken up in defense of their Catholic brethren and against the bigotry. That the founder of "Blandshardism" was behind what turned into the so-called "Americans United for the Separation of Church and State" had escaped me, till now. (Formerly: "Protestants and Other Americans...."). That Chuck Colson spoke out is not surprising at all. He's been a leader in Evangelical-Catholic relations and should be commended for his example.

Comments

[James A. Altena]

Bravo to Robert George, Chuck Colson, and the other signers of the statement.

RE: the editorial cartoon in the Phialdelphia Inquirer -- I live in Phiadelphia. Resident Inquirer cartoonist Tony Auth -- who, to the everlasting disgrace of journalism once won a Pultizer Prize for his work -- is quite possibly the most vicious leftist bigot in his profession in the US today. He has even drawn cartoons showing priests and elephants (i.e. Republicans) murdering people with clubs, axes, board with nails implanted in them, etc., while his draftmanship skills would embarass most 4th graders. In a previous generation, he would have been a cartoonist for Pravda or Julius Streicher's "Der Stuermer".

[Bobby Winters]

>>Nor was anything heard from the mainline Protestant denominations that are regarded by many Catholic liberals as Catholicism’s true friends and ecumenical conversation partners. Leaders of the Presbyterian Church U.S.A., the Episcopal Church, the United Methodist Church, the United Church of Christ, etc. were silent. The prejudice antennae of these leaders–ordinarily so sensitive–seems to shut down when the victims of prejudice are Catholics.<<

I am ashamed.

[Stuart Koehl]

>>>The prejudice antennae of these leaders–ordinarily so sensitive–seems to shut down when the victims of prejudice are Catholics.<<<

It wasn't so much that the justices in question were Catholic, but that they were the "wrong" type of Catholic. Had they been good "progressive" Catholics (e.g., Methodists with a cabaret license), holding to all the "right" opinions on abortion, homosexuality, the ordination of women, etc., they would never have tolerated this kind of slur. Of course, had the justices been the "right" kind of Catholic, they never would have issued that decision, hence the cartoon and the associated slurs would not have been necessary. It isn't so much a "Catholic" thing as it is a "traditional Christian" thing. And if adherence to the Christian Tradition that invokes such bile gets no reaction from the Mainline, one can only assume that the Mainline no longer identifies with the Christian Tradition.

[David Gray]

>And if adherence to the Christian Tradition that invokes such bile gets no reaction from the Mainline, one can only assume that the Mainline no longer identifies with the Christian Tradition.

And there is an abundance of other evidence that this is the case.