Bishop Thomas J. Tobin conducts an imaginary interview with President Obama. Pretty awesome stuff. Thanks to the reader who sent this in.
But do you consider the heartfelt convictions of pro-lifers to be "childish behaviors?"
previous post
11 comments
Very clever article. Putting his words in a format that we are very familiar with, really shows what’s going on. Also, be leary of his appointments to his cabinet. Its what is not being brought forward in the press that we need to worry about (i.e. their ideologies not their tax paying habits).
Thank you, Bishop Tobin! I hope it’s not a sin to be immensely proud of one’s appointed apostle!
I hope this msg spreads and makes people THINK!! So many Catholics seemed to be simply enchanted with the personality of Obama. Time to wake up.
Since between various novenas and the upcoming 40 Days For Life campaign (Feb 25- April 5, see http://www.40daysforlife.com) I have too many numbers in my head to keep track of, I’ve committed to praying a Memorare at the end of every Rosary for the sake of Obama’s conversion. That I’ve remembered, so far. Anyone want to join me?
With all of his gifts (and he does have many) great advancements for the protection and respect of all life could still come via the political leadership of Obama. But not while his head is on backwards.
Thanks for posting this, Jeff. As a gift and an encouragement to our “pro-life, 365 days a year” Church, it was SWEET!
Good, except Obama would never be this direct in saying things like “right to kill their children.” Instead, we get the camoflage of “reducing the need for abortion. In my estimation, when considering Dems’ “reducing abortion” marketing strategy, Zippy nailed it:
Putatively pro-life liberals are setting things up such that standing down on the legal initiatives is treated as a prerequisite for unity on non-legal initiatives, and non-legal initiatives are inextricably tied to validating and supporting the legal status quo. The objective purpose or formal cause (independent of intentions) is not unity on all things pro-life, but silencing and neutralizing the legal initiative. A true unity would be a both/and proposition, not “stand down on the intolerant legal issues as a means to the end of ‘working together’ on social programs.”
The whole thing is just another gambit of Hell, and those who embrace it are, whatever their subjective intentions, fighting on the side of Hell.
Good, except as Scott mentions, the use of “right to kill their children” damages the plausibility and punctures the irony. But kudos to Bishop Tobin for the piece as a whole. In teaching his flock this way, he’s at least trying to get more and more of them to examine their loyalties and re-set their priorities.
When my parish’s pastor lauded the election of Obama at daily Mass on the day after the election, I asked him how he would feel when the new President abolished the Mexico City policy, among other evil acts. I got an “of course, I oppose that, but..” answer. I hope now that it’s happened, he’s wiser. He’s of the 60’s generation, so I have more hope in the priests that will follow him.
i’m not so keen to praise this one yet…
well, i’m not an American, and here in Singapore, we have rather decent abortion legislation (which stops short of making it illegal, but still provides compulsory counselling before and after). and while i’m continuously appalled at how apathetic my fellow countrymen are with regard to all things political, i must say that the partisanship (i can so far witness) in America is really near the opposite extreme.
when you have a Bishop coming up to make such a post – so uncharitable in nature – is that really a good thing for Catholics?
while here in “disneyland-with-the-death-penalty Singapore” our politicians would be wont to sue any such posts (even on a personal blog) for defamation – yes, this is the strait-jacket end of extreme – Bishops in America seem quite unrestrained in their expression of (to put it mildly) exasperation.
yes, Obama is on an ideological knife-edge and he seems to be stabbing Catholics with pro-choice rhetoric – but is it right to respond with anti-Obama rhetoric, then?
i don’t know… perhaps caricature and satire-bordering-on-mocking is part and parcel of American politics… even so, you won’t be earning any friends on the fence (much less from the pro-choice camp) by posting such spiteful words in a pretend-reality: especially coming from a Bishop!
would you expect any Vatican representative to post something like that for all to see, critique, read their own angle into, and misinterpret in their own private space? even from a diplomacy-POV, the piece just would not contribute much to the cause – other than perhaps stoke the already-red-hot self-righteous zeal of the pro-life Catholics towards implosion-levels?
i’m pro-life, but i’m also for mature, sober discourse. the Truth will set us free; all we need to do is stand by the Truth with faith, hope, and love.
I’m not seeing anything uncharitable in the post. Perhaps you can give a specific example? In fact, some of it is put together from the actual words of Obama. Other parts are in line with his actions. I took issue of course with the “right to kill their children”, but Obama has practically said as much in his declaration that he doesn’t want women “punished with a baby.” His declaration that the question of when life begins is “above my pay-grade” is verbatim. While I doubt also that Obama would flat out say that “Well, I believe it was important for me to fulfill the campaign promises I made to Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers. After all, they’re among my biggest supporters and I don’t want to disappoint them.” that happens to be one of those niggles we call facts. So I would need to see the charge of uncharitable substantiated.
I agree that Obama would not speak of a “right to kill children”, and this piece is tricky in that Obama’s voice is part Obama/part what Bishop Tobins invents so that he can speak to what Obama would never admit he is saying, essentially. (It has the flavor of a mixed metaphor). Yet the column is bound to effect change in RI Catholics.
Gerg
I can witness to the effectiveness of this “method” of Bishop Tobin’s which may be more a combination of character and authority than intentional method–ie, it may be God’s design. My conversion to an unconditional pro-life understanding came about following a real debate between Bishop Tobin and our RI Catholic-personally-I’m-pro-life-but politicians.
Those who are listening to/reading the bishop’s words tend to have one of two reactions: they welcome them and are encouraged by them to stand strong in their faith, or they get mad and spout all sorts of pent-up politically correct nonsense. A percentage of the latter reactors will receive the blessing of an apostolic correction. They will be grateful for it.
Some context may help. RI is a Catholic state, gathered into the one diocese of Providence. Most Catholics in RI, despite all the firm teachings of their bishop, voted for the most pro-abortion president ever. So much for “mature, sober discourse”, of which there was plenty.
As to “you won’t be earning any friends on the fence (much less from the pro-choice camp)”, well that was my argument once, too. :). The Bishop isn’t in the business of earning many friends, though–he’s in the business of saving souls. What is more charitable than that?
Regarding “partisanship”, Bishop Tobin is not a Republican. I did not become a Republican because of anything he said, either, but because of what Hilary Clinton and Barak Obama said in response to the partial-birth abortion ban. I committed to not being “party to” the pro-death platform from the time of their response, forward. Their zeal for “women’s reproductive rights” will kill even more than the 1.2 million children a year who die by abortion in our country annually.
“Already-red-hot self-righteous zeal of the pro-life Catholics” ? Most of the pro-life Catholics in my state have been intimidated for so long that they are afraid to admit in public to being pro-life! It’s not just friends they will lose; it’s job loss many fear.
This is a democracy. No one should suffer job discrimination for defending the unborn peacefully! I’m hoping our 3rd 40 Days For Life campaign this Lent will strengthen them.
If I were the Bishop, I would have come right out and asked, “Are you people completely disobedient and utterly insane, or are you just stupid? HOW many times have I told you…”
That’s just one of the million reasons, besides my gender, why I’m not a bishop.
I pray that Providence (and every diocese), understands their obligation to protect innocent and vulnerable life SOON. Otherwise, lightning might be headed our way. Or worse, our bishop may just shake the dust from his feet.
To paraphrase a Bishop Tobin statement from the very article that lead to my unconditional pro-life convictions, “If your job prohibits you from being pro-life, quit. Better to lose your job than your soul.”
Amen, and thank you, Bishop Tobin! I can hear, now! And I can speak!
Thanks joanne fot that excellent tesitmony.
i had a funny feeling my comments needed to be educated by the context! =) the internet definitely doesn’t provide much context – but it provides plenty of cud to chew on.
perhaps i am completely mistaken about zealous pro-lifers… maybe they’re only a myth perpetrated by the quantity of sharpmouthed catholic bloggers!
while i understand that the message is largely meant for his own diocese, stringing a bunch of Obama rhetoric (whether he really said them is not as important as the deliberately selective context which the imagined interview compiles them) to rail loudly against the (rather obviously) most pro-abortion president ever (in the world, some may add!) is still nearly ad hominem – or so i would say. that is why i say “uncharitable”, but all from my POV here in insular Singapore. maybe the mudslinging is so prevalent over in the US that such is now the norm, to which i may add Romans 12:2. or Matthew 5:44. (just happened to glance these lines today!)
the zealous abortionists may lead to 1.2 million deaths, but no evil could justify an evil deed in return. we are, after all, sheep sent to the wolves… but we do what we can to survive intact! it may seem folly that amid such immense political tension that some foreigner would suggest using the original Jesus method, but the Lamb gave Himself to the slaughter and kickstarted this, our Church of Holy Martyrs. in the face of the worst enemy, the most Christian response is probably still love.
so… the crux of the matter is this: have we come to demonise the pro-choicers? have we, in our zeal (flabby or otherwise), come to objectify these enemies as non-human, the Other, or pure evil? have we even accidentally hated them without understanding their context? compassion is what converts the sinner and turns them to repentance – not rhetorical banging. while one could recover the less deviant flock through the proverbial “rude awakening”, others would probably require the softer approach.
the rest… no amount of hellfire would be sufficient (no judgement intended… who knows, there might be no “the rest” after the soft approach?) so ergo, no amount of hellfire required on our part.
lastly, by “partisanship” i did not mean the Two Parties; i meant the whole division by ideology of the American public. to me, it shouldn’t be a purely “us against them” construction: many may still simply be misinformed, no? that’s where i came up with “friends sitting on the fence” who are still waiting for a hand from the correct side of the fence. just because some were pulled by that friendly hand on the wrong side of the fence does not mean the person is evil, hopeless, stupid, or whatever. it just means we on the right side of the fence have to find some way to bring them back over, or better still, tear down this fence so all may return.
With due respect, the question of prudence over whether to use the hard of soft approach is appropiately left to the bishop in question and suggesting impure motives should only be entertained if there is a concrete reason to suspect it. And it’s not ad hominem–Obama’s actions and arguments are not detestable because of some personal shortcoming in Obama or simply because he is The Other; they are detestable all on their own and have repeatedly and validly shown to be so.
Gerg,
I certainly remembered you during the Second Reading at Mass this morning. 🙂
I’ve been debating myself for half the day, as a result. Thank you for the challenge. 🙂
Still, I think that St Paul’s words are often misapplied. I don’t think, for instance, that we are supposed to wish the abortionist a successful day as he goes about his business, nor do I think that we should smile and look the other way when our newly elected president deceives Catholics and all Christians with empty words about “hope” while he continues to prop up the abortion industry. Obama is not just a soul in need of guidance and truth, he is a wolf in SHEPHERD’S clothing currently. It is right that true shepherds should take notice and sound an alarm.
To be “all things to all people” does not mean that we should be pro-choice in the presence of abortion advocates; “Judge not lest you should be judged” does not mean that we allow children in the womb to be slaughtered, etc. Twisting Scripture is a favorite pastime of the devil.
Additionally, while Bishop Tobin’s column is addressed directly to his see, it is read across the country. Sadly, when the Bishop takes a firm, controversial stance, he gets more supportive feedback from beyond RI borders than from within. From his flock, he too often receives criticism and even vulgar or violent comments (Especially when he protects the human dignity of immigrants and the unborn). Hmmmm…Come to think of it, that’s a mark of prophecy, isn’t it?