Archbp. Chaput: “We are Catholics before we are Americans”

More from Archbp. Chaput:

CLICK TO BUY

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Cri de Coeur, Our Catholic Identity, Religious Liberty, The future and our choices, Year of Faith and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

47 Responses to Archbp. Chaput: “We are Catholics before we are Americans”

  1. dnicoll says:

    And in England during the Reformation that is why we were considered Traitors.

  2. Darren says:

    I agree 100%. I am Catholic… then I am American. Or should I say, I am an American Catholic, not a Catholic American. The American part can (though I hope it never will) change. The Catholic will NEVER change.

    We say “God and Country”, we do not say “Country and God.”

  3. Texana says:

    “(Abortion) is a very serious issue that requires absolute adherence on the part of Catholics, and if we don’t stand united on this issue we’re bound to failure…”. Because it is an intrinsic evil, abortion must not be supported by Catholics as legal in the instances of rape, incest, and the physical/psychological health of the mother.

  4. SKAY says:

    Obama is now talking about his ability to nominate judges to the Supreme Court who will uphold Roe v Wade so that abortion on demand will continue—if he is re-elected. Apparently he is trying to recapture the lead he had with the womens vote.
    For any Catholic it is clear that a vote for Obama is a vote for abortion and the HHS mandate that will eliminate our first ammendment freedom of religion.

  5. Jacob says:

    Forty years ago Brent Bozell was being excoriated for saying the same thing (albeit a bit more strongly) in the pages of Triumph. Are American Catholics ready for it now?

  6. fib09002 says:

    Muslims say this kind of thing all the time, that their faith comes before their national identity. Which is why we frequently hear of all these “Americans” joining terrorist groups in Somalia and elsewhere. Obviously it is considered “Islamophobia” to point this out, however. When a Catholic says the same thing, though, we can expect him to endure some criticism.

  7. frjim4321 says:

    Wow, he really tipped his hand and revealed himself as an in-the-tank-for-the-RNC zealot when he referred wrongly to the “democrat” party rather than the proper term, “Democratic” party. He either does not know the proper nomenclature (doubtful) or his has embraced the insulting practice of purposely not calling his partisan competitors by their proper name.

    I don’t know how he would expect any Catholic member of the Democratic party to take him at all seriously. I certainly don’t

    Further he makes the same error as do some of his cohort by failing to properly understand the nature of political discourse and putting more stock in what people say about abortion versus the actual incidence of abortion.

    I am so glad he is not my ordinary.

  8. frjim4321 says:

    I am so glad he is not my ordinary.

    Okay, that might have been overly harsh and I retract it.

    If he were my ordinary, I don’t think we would get along very well.

  9. David Collins says:

    Democrat party or democratic party: only an in-the-tank-DNC-zealot would think there’s an important difference between the two.

    How can Americans have a national identity? A person’s family can be from any where and still be American. You can have any religion or no religion at all and still be American. You can grow up speaking Urdu in the home and still be an American. There is no historical memory to speak of. So being American is nothing more than what government do you pay taxes to.

  10. frjim4321 says:

    democrat party or Democratic party: only an in-the-tank-DNC-zealot would think there’s an important difference between the two.

    David, (1) I’m not getting up there using twisted logic to get people to vote for my candidate, (2) it’s pretty clear what the name of the party is, just look at the website. It’s the Democratic National Committee, and the challengers have been playing this game for a long time purposely not using the right name.

    I don’t know if we will have a clear winner on the morning after but (1) I certainly hope SCOTUS doesn’t have a coronation this year and (2) if my candidate is the winner it will be hard for me to be sportsmanlike after all the dirty tricks and disrespect from the other side.

  11. Southern Catholic says:

    Further he makes the same error as do some of his cohort by failing to properly understand the nature of political discourse and putting more stock in what people say about abortion versus the actual incidence of abortion.

    You continue to use this twisted logic to justify your pro-death position, even though you have been called out on it multiple times by Father Z and other posters on here. My question to you, if you truly are a priest, how can you morally and consentingly support a position that is taught to be instinctively evil by the Church you claim to serve?

  12. frjim4321 says:

    You continue to use this twisted logic to justify your pro-death position, even though you have been called out on it multiple times by Father Z and other posters on here. My question to you, if you truly are a priest, how can you morally and consentingly support a position that is taught to be instinctively evil by the Church you claim to serve?

    b/c I don’t love everything about the President, in fact I know that both candidates are far from perfect. Nevertheless I see the President as being the lesser of two evils; I give the challenger no points for having the upper hand with regard to morality because (1) he has changed his position regarding choice in the past, (2) he has changed his position on a raft of other issues recently and (3) the RNC has bent over backwards for the past two years trying make sure the poor, blacks and the young would not be able to vote. The flagrant efforts of the RNC to corrupt the democratic process disqualifies them from claiming the ethical high ground in this election.

  13. Suburbanbanshee says:

    I’m distressed that someone would nitpick the local dialectal speech of Archbishop Chaput. I’m also surprised that anybody would not know that certain regions in this country have the dialectal habit of referring to it as the Democrat Party, including lifelong Democrats of yellow-dog loyalty. The -ic part is more easily swallowed and elided than pronounced, in these dialectal areas. But alas, such is the lot of the undiscovered America between the two coasts.

    Frankly, if a dialect has to choose between “Democrat Party” and “Democrack Party,” I think the more flattering elision is quite clear.

  14. Phil_NL says:

    @Suburbanbanshee

    “Frankly, if a dialect has to choose between “Democrat Party” and “Democrack Party,” I think the more flattering elision is quite clear.”

    Yes. The more accurate one is very much debatable though.

  15. David Collins says:

    OK, Fr. Jim, OK. It just seems nitpicking to insist on Democratic party.

    It is certainly insane to think Romney is really means it when he says he is pro-life. How convenient it was for him to have a road-to-Damascus experience prior to running in Republican primaries.

    If Romney wins, it will probably be, given the changing demographics of the US, the last hurrah for the Grand Old Party.

  16. ckdexterhaven says:

    I am shocked that a Catholic priest is supporting a political party that spent their whole convention as a tribute to abortion. A political party that purposely left God out of their platform. This party didn’t even want the word God in the platform.

    The kill lists that have killed hundreds of innocent Pakistanis, talk about disenfranchised minorities…. Seems to bother not at all.

    FrJim, maybe Archbishop Chaput was talking to Democratics as well as Republicans?

  17. JonPatrick says:

    I guess I have a hard time understanding how anyone can support a politician who is so overtly pro-abortion. To me this is like the Christians in the 18th and 19th century that justified slavery. It is not just one of many issues, it stands alone as it is about whether or not a human being is allowed to live. The ultimate disenfranchisement.

  18. JonPatrick says:

    One thing that I find frustrating about people in the secular world (and unfortunately some in the Catholic world also such as Fr. Jim) is the tendency to see everything as a political issue, left vs. right. In fact Catholic doctrine aligns with some “left wing” stands such as caring for the poor, as well as “right wing” stands such as pro-life, pro-traditional marriage. The Church should be above aligning with any particular party, because neither party perfectly aligns with Catholic doctrine, plus the fact that the realities of political life and the compromises that are perceived to be necessary in a democratic society in order to get elected and to govern, causes most politicians to vary from even the compromised (from a Catholic standpoint) positions that they take.

    In the past the bishops for various reasons ended up aligning themselves more with the Democratic party due to the perceived good by working with government programs. They now see that tying themselves to that party meant also tying themselves to social policies that violate key Catholic doctrine, and are attempting to return to a more politically neutral stand, which is interpreted by those who see things only through a political lens as siding with the conservatives.

  19. Imrahil says:

    Well, dear @JonPatrick, whatever to be said about seeing things as a political issue (my own concept is the 1. a thing becomes political the instant it is made an issue by campaigners and politicians, 2. that even about political things there may be absolute truth), caring for the poor is not left wing; and being pro-life is only a very accidental position of present right-wing parties, who justly never have lost the wonder about this being an issue at all.

    Caring for the poor is, if anything, right-wing, because the words as they stand would speak about “caring”, a personal thing, and “the poor”, a quite politically incorrect expression. Providing for the lower classes would be the left-wing thing, of course (by which I do not mean necessarily an evil thing); and especially (though I do not buy into the doctrine that all left-wingism is eo ipso Socialism, and this would be) the background thought that all citizens should in effect be civil-servants.

    It is the regrettable fact (but not a necessity, and even less something to be accepted) that the parties do not all of them differ somewhat from Catholic doctrine. But that means not that the Catholic Church is above parties (except, of course, in rank of her mission, holiness, etc.), especially as that breeds the other thought that if a thing is contested politically, both positions would be of equal worth to the Church. It means that the Catholic Church is all with this party on this point and all with that on the other – of course only as far as the accordance goes.

    And even aligning with a party is sometimes a natural event. I see the Catholic Church in America aligned to the Republican Party for all foreseeable time (which, technically, equals zero, as “prognoses are hard especially if they concern the future”, it’s said; but you see what I mean).

  20. robtbrown says:

    kdexterhaven says:

    I am shocked that a Catholic priest is supporting a political party that spent their whole convention as a tribute to abortion.

    Ever hear of the Stockholm Syndrome?

  21. Marion Ancilla Mariae says:

    “As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.” Joshua 24:15

    When many of the people of England (16th c.) chose to follow their monarch into rebellion against Christ’s representative on Earth, and therefore against Christ Himself, it was only to be expected that they would attack the Catholics who remained faithful to the Pope and to the Lord.

    “Traitors,” “not loyal Englishmen,” “Papists,” etc. Many English and Irish men and women, while loyal to their homelands, but to God first, willingly shed their blood rather than to reverse these two allegiances.

    Are American Catholics of today willing to uphold the same standard that the Catholic martyrs of the Reformation died for? No compromise when it comes to the Law of God.

    “God and country.” God first. Country second.

  22. wmeyer says:

    Nevertheless I see the President as being the lesser of two evils…

    Which alone calls into question your reasoning, and your commitment to Church teaching. Obama is the most determined pro-abortion president in history, and is bent on the destruction of our economy, as well.

  23. SKAY says:

    frjim

    “RNC has bent over backwards for the past two years trying make sure the poor, blacks and the young would not be able to vote.” How?
    Is it your belief that non citizens should be able to vote in our elections in this country?State ID’s are free in my state.

    “(1) he has changed his position regarding choice in the past”
    So did I. Since it happened to me–I know that it CAN and DOES happen and for a v. How sad that – as a priest-that is your view but It does sound like the Democrat/Democratic(whatever) talking points.

    “The flagrant efforts of the RNC to corrupt the democratic process disqualifies them from claiming the ethical high ground in this election.”
    Since you were unaware of the attempt by the Black Panthers to intimidate voters during the last
    election you are probably not keeping up with the Democrat/Democratic(whatever) activities to corrupt the democratic process.
    Full disclosure–I was a Democra(voted for some Democrats)t until I realized how undemocratic(corrupt) they had become. Yes–another change. I don’t agree with all Republican all the time–but it is clear where the Democrat/Democratic(whatever) party and Obama are going and it has nothing to do with freedom.

  24. SKAY says:

    Sorry –I did not finish the sentence.

    –I know that it CAN and DOES happen and for a variety of reasons.

  25. Cathy says:

    Wow, for the record, I did not hear Archbishop Chaput say anything about a Catholic having to be in the tank for either party. He did say that partisanship can be a danger to the Catholic faith regardless of which party one associates with and that our loyalty is with Christ and the Church. While a Democrat Governor in New York pushed for homosexual so-called marriage in New York, it did not pass without the votes of Republicans and Catholic Republican representatives at the state level.
    http://www.christianpost.com/news/new-york-senate-approves-gay-marriage-bill-51559/
    For the record, I am not a partisan voter, I am a discriminate voter. I often wish there were no R or D after a purported representatives name. I remember this being proposed in a state, at the state level, but being decried because people would not know how to vote. Wow!

  26. Giuseppe says:

    In response to the silly-sounding “Democrat” Party, a neighbor has starting calling the other party the Republic Party. Mind you, she supports the Republic candidate Mitt Romney. But she has gotten people to say the correct name of the Democratic Party. Despite how much one may loathe the opposition, why not call them by their proper name?

    This election is going to be close, Congress may still be split, and I fear that neither candidate can temper the loathing and lack of cooperation that exists between die-hard members of each party.

  27. Late for heaven says:

    “Further he makes the same error as do some of his cohort by failing to properly understand the nature of political discourse and putting more stock in what people say about abortion versus the actual incidence of abortion.”

    It occurs to me that despite any and all political structures that may be voted on or imposed by fiat, from the point of view of saving my soul it is still MY personal obligation to care for the needy. Nor is there ANY political structure that could prevent me from fulfilling my obligation to those in need. I am all in favor of the efficiencies that federal programs can often provide, but such programs do not substitute for my own acts of mercy. Nor can they address the more important imperative to save souls. It is undeniable that there is far less poverty in this country now than 50 years ago for example, but also evident that we have lost many many souls during the same time.

    The first thing anyone needs is life itself, our heavenly gift of being. The primary act of mercy is to protect life.

    As for the actual numbers of abortions I believe that both sides agree on that data. And if you are referring to the effects of abortion on the mother, there is now much damning evidence about that as well.

  28. Thank you Archbishop Chaput — with such a French flavored name… As said St Joan of Arch « Our Lord is first served » (by the way Joan was borned in 1412, that’s six centuries ago… Please keep praying for France as we are facing dangerous challenges).

  29. happyCatholic says:

    Two things:
    First, frjim’s comment is ironic, because on another message board a poster excoriated a journalist who used the term “Democratic Party” as being completely ignorant, as the proper term was “Democrat Party.” A quick google search on my part found support for using either term.

    Second,
    If any of the erudite :-) posters here are so inclined, could you possibly add some comments to this article on the WaPo website? The vitriol and bigotry over there spun me up so much yesterday that I signed up both on that board (pretty painless) as well as signing up here (thanks, Father Z!) so as to defend (over there) and recruit (over here) some who will defend Holy Mother Church. I was so spun up I “replied” to so many posts on the WaPo website that I think it would strengthen the replies if it were not just coming from me! There was a smattering of a few other posts defending Archbishop Chaput, too. But seriously, folks, these people want to strip the Archbishop (and us) of our citizenship. And their failure in historical knowledge and logical thinking is at times breathtaking — and I don’t think mine is all that stellar. However, my thinking is while, many of those posters over there may be a lost cause, readers who might be a bit more open-minded may be persuadable. I have seen that happen on other boards where people of good will were actually open to being persuaded by patient but firm explications of the truth.

    And with all due respect, maybe I am not asking for frjim to answer this appeal for “posting help.” ;-) I think his views may already be well represented there.

  30. Sissy says:

    frjim4321 said: ” the RNC has bent over backwards for the past two years trying make sure the poor, blacks and the young would not be able to vote”

    Father Jim, I’ve seen you make this claim repeatedly, and yet, you never cited a single piece of evidence as proof. Isn’t it uncharitable to make false accusations? Exactly what has the Republican National Committee done to “make sure” anyone can’t vote?

  31. catholicmidwest says:

    David Collins,
    Maybe you don’t have an American identity but I do. I’m descended from colonists that fought the Revolutionary War on both sides of my family. This may be trivial to you, but not to many of the oldest American families. That said, it’s not the same thing now to say you’re American that it was just a few short years ago. The condition of the country is disgraceful. The country lies face down in the gutter. It’s very painful to watch.

    It’s also very painful to have to make a choice between being Catholic and being American. It’s not like we will run off to some other country though. Patriots stand their ground and do the right thing. A person can be both Catholic and American and that must always be the case. Otherwise America no longer exists, and this is just real estate.

  32. catholicmidwest says:

    frjim4321,
    It’s too bad Archbishop Chaput isn’t your ordinary.

  33. wmeyer says:

    Father Jim, I’ve seen you make this claim repeatedly, and yet, you never cited a single piece of evidence as proof.

    On the other hand, Sissy, it’s the same level of proof he offered on the evils of the RNC. I’m no big fan of either party at this point, but with the Republicans, we have some chance to undo the damage done; with the Dems, the damage will increase.

  34. Sissy says:

    wmeyer, we have also asked for and never receive any evidence that supports Fr. Jim’s repeated claims that there will be fewer abortions under the Obama regime. He claims he is basing his support for Obama on this slender reed -that fewer children will be murdered during an Obama administration – a suggestion that is preposterous. I can’t comprehend that a priest could continue to support this man.

  35. frjim4321 says:

    Father Jim, I’ve seen you make this claim repeatedly, and yet, you never cited a single piece of evidence as proof. Sissy

    You must be kidding . . . it’s on the news every day. The Speaker of the House of PA is even on video bragging that voter suppression there will assure a Romney win!

    For more: http://www.aclu.org/maps/battle-protect-ballot-voter-suppression-measures-passed-2011

  36. wmeyer says:

    we have also asked for and never receive any evidence that supports Fr. Jim’s repeated claims that there will be fewer abortions under the Obama regime.

    Perhaps he’s simply observed that in the last 20 years, there has been a gradual decline in abortions in the USA: http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html

    But that decline seems to have ended: http://www.mccl.org/us-abortion-stats.html

  37. Clinton R. says:

    Archbp. Chaput: “We are Catholics before we are Americans”

    Amen! God will not judge us on our national origin, but He will judge His people on how they followed His teachings and that of His Holy Church.

  38. Sissy says:

    Father Jim, Illinois is a Democrat-run state. Chicago has long been governed by the Democrat machine. Yet, a poll worker in Chicago asked President Obama to show photo ID in order to vote yesterday. Was that an attempt to suppress a minority from voting? Why aren’t you exercised about Democrats doing that? What is your evidence that asking anyone for identification is voter suppression? Just saying it doesn’t make it so. Are you similarly concerned about US citizens being asked for photo ID to buy a handgun? Is that racist?

  39. wmeyer says:

    Voting is almost the only legal action a citizen can take without photo ID. These same people for whom it “would be a hardship” to obtain a free photo ID almost certainly have done other things for which they were required to produce such ID.

    The rationale against requiring photo ID for voters is so strained as to be utterly preposterous, except to the mind of a liberal.

  40. frjim4321 says:

    frjim4321,
    It’s too bad Archbishop Chaput isn’t your ordinary. – Cmw

    Why?

    Tho I would not be a good fit in that see. A bit right of center for me in the 70′s.

    And still!

    My posts are prob looking bad – learning a new Device. Learning curve

  41. bookworm says:

    “a poll worker in Chicago asked President Obama to show photo ID in order to vote yesterday.”

    In Illinois you have to show photo ID to vote EARLY, but it is not required for voting on Election Day itself. I’ve never been asked for photo ID when I vote on Election Day; the election judges just ask my name and check to see whether it is on the rolls for my precinct. If I vote early (which I did 2 years ago, and plan to do again this year) I must go to the local courthouse and there I am asked to show ID.

  42. Southern Catholic says:

    (1) he has changed his position regarding choice in the past, (2) he has changed his position on a raft of other issues recently and (3) the RNC has bent over backwards for the past two years trying make sure the poor, blacks and the young would not be able to vote.

    (1) So? Obama has been the greatest abortion supporter of all presidents, and has increased the funding to those in the business of providing abortions. The only way Romney could be worse is if he rounded up and killed the first born of all Americans. (2) Diversion from the issue at hand and (3) another diversion. If you seriously believe that “voter suppression” is on the level or greater than abortion, you clearly should evaluate your conscious and what the church teaches about forming said conscious.

  43. David Collins says:

    Dear catholicmidwest, it is not trivial to me that your family goes all the way back to the Revolutionary War. I mourn the loss of American identity.

    Otherwise America no longer exists, and this is just real estate. Yes, indeed. God bless you sir in your effort to remain a Catholic American.

  44. Sissy says:

    bookworm said: “In Illinois you have to show photo ID to vote EARLY, but it is not required for voting on Election Day itself. I’ve never been asked for photo ID when I vote on Election Day;”

    Well, thanks for that clarification, bookworm. So, only those minorities voting early experience voter suppression. How can Democrats permit this?????

  45. bookworm says:

    “Patriots stand their ground and do the right thing. A person can be both Catholic and American and that must always be the case.”

    That is true. However, does this mean that the many Religious and lay persons who emigrated to America from their home countries to escape persecution, oppression, or just lack of economic opportunity were NOT doing the right thing? If it was OK for our ancestors to flee when things got bad, why would it not be OK for us to do so — though I’m not sure where we would go.

  46. SKAY says:

    frjim-In reference to your link–it would be nice if the ACLU cared as much about Democrat voter fraud .

    ‘Bridgeport Mayor Bill Finch is at it again. The Democrat who presided over a 2010 vote casting and counting scandal in the tight race for governor was caught on video Friday guaranteeing Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Christopher Murphy a big result in the state’s largest city–even if it takes days to count.

    Bridgeport provided a crucial and dubious margin of victory to Democratic and Working Families Governor Dannel P. Malloy in 2010 amidst unprecedented chaos at the city’s polling places. The 2010 Bridgeport assault on democracy included photocopied ballots, altered hours at polling places, a mysterious bag of votes and Finch’s abuse of the city’s emergency notification system to increase turnout on Election Day.

    Murphy, locked in a dead heat with Republican Linda McMahon, needs the grimy Bridgeport Guarantee. He got it from Finch on Friday while visiting small businesses in the poverty-wracked city. A laughing Finch boasts even if it takes a couples of days to get the results,”You can be guaranteed you’re going to get the vote.” Two years after the 2010 fiasco, it remains no laughing matter to the rest of Connecticut.”

  47. ckdexterhaven says:

    Gee, I hope the ACLU is on the case in Ohio. This Republican voter fraud must be investigated.
    http://www.humanevents.com/2012/10/26/is-voter-fraud-being-committed-in-ohio/

    One wonders if they are even citizens, if they don’t speak English. But I hope we don’t disenfranchise them by asking for an I.D. Consarn it! These dastardly Republicans must be stopped.

    COLUMBUS, Ohio — Two volunteer poll workers at an Ohio voting station told Human Events that they observed van loads of Ohio residents born in Somalia — the state is home to the second-largest Somali population in the United States — being driven to the voting station and guided by Democratic interpreters on the voting process. No Republican interpreters were present, according to these volunteers.A source, who wishes to remain anonymous, is a volunteer outside the Morse Road polling center.  She has witnessed Somalis who cannot speak English come to the polling center. They are brought in groups, by van or bus. The Democrats hand them a slate card and say, “vote Brown all the way down.” Given that Sherrod Brown is the incumbent Democrat Senator in Ohio, one can assume that this is the reference.