UPDATED! Atlanta Bishop will not attend awards luncheon for pro-abort politician
Archbishop Wilton D. Gregory, of Atlanta, puts out this statement:
I have decided not to be present at the St. Thomas More Society’s Awards Luncheon following the Red Mass because the organziation has independently selected 3 attorneys to honor, one of whom is former Governor Roy Barnes. While I recognize and applaud Governor Barnes’ efforts surrounding the controversy of the Georgia state flag, his support of abortion is contrary to the church’s teaching. The Catholic Church proclaims that human life is sacred and that the dignity of the human person is the very foundation of a moral vision for society.
Background: STM Society is an independent society of Catholic lawyers, but in their annual luncheon and Red Mass they welcome attorneys of all faiths (or lacks thereof) and thus they honor jurists for various acts. Former Gov. Barnes is being honored for getting the Georgia flag changed, and also for dedicating much of his service as a lawyer to the poor since he left office. But when he ran for governor in 1998, he was loudly pro-abortion. He’s not Catholic, so he is not bound by the Church’s teaching on the subject. But, in the Catholic community in Atlanta there’s been an outcry that a Catholic organization shouldn’t be honoring anyone who’s pro-abortion, especially vocally and publicly so. STM Society operates independently of the diocese, so the Bishop can’t keep them from giving Barnes an award. But, he is making a statement by not going to the awards luncheon.
In the Georgia Bulletin I got in the mail yesterday, there’s the statement above as well as an accompanying story on the subject. As of this writing, the Georgia Bulletin’s website hasn’t been updated, so I can’t link you to the article, but I will transcribe parts of it here:
“We appreciate Archbishop Gregory’s celebrating the Red Mass and his friendship to our Society. We will miss him at the luncheon, and it is an unfortunate turn of events that will cause his absences,” [Michael Sullivan, immediate past president of the society] said in a written statement.
The Church is losing an opportunity to build bridges in an ecumenical spirit because of a “small but loud minority,” he said. “the vast majority of catholics, not to mention our non-Catholic guests-applaud the specific good actions for which we are recognizing these three honorees,” Sullivan said.
Ahh, there we go. Insult the Bishop and state that he would never reasonably make the decision not to attend based on his principles, but rather based on a small but loud minority. Never mind that it could scandalize the Church and Her members for the Bishop to be present where a publicly pro-abort politician is honored.
Andrew Nelson, staff writer for the Bulletin, includes much superfluous information from people and semi-Catholic colleges in his article. Examples:
Jesuit Father Thomas Reese, a political scientist of the Woodstock Theological Center at Georgetown University, said the Atlanta lawyer group faces the same dilemma as Catholic colleges. In fact, he thinks Catholic groups could avoid the disputes by not ranting honors to elected officials altogether. [I could agree with this one]
Critics may “falsely assume” a church group is applauding a politician’s entire career, instead of one specific act, he said.
“They might want to honor someone for their work with the poor, of with heath care, or immigrants,” he said. “…Does he have to be perfect on every position the Church has?” [poor, health care, immigrants? reads like a list of leftist talking points. coincidence?]
Kudos to the Archbishop for doing the politically incorrect thing! I’ll get links up to the actual articles if/when they are posted to the Bulletin’s website.
UPDATE: The full text of the article cited here can now be found here.
I’ve also posted links to the original article and all the follow up letters to the editor here.
Posted in Catholic Moral Teaching, In the news... | 
12 Comments »
September 23rd, 2007 at 11:54 am
You wrote, “He’s not Catholic, so he is not bound by the Church’s teaching on the subject.”
Did you mean that?? We are ALL, Catholic or not, bound by the Church’s teaching on abortion. It is basic natural law.
It is wrong for anyone to support abortion, homicide, genocide, child abuse, theft, adultery, etc. … these aren’t rules for Catholics only.
We should never confuse natural law with Canon law (which is an example of a law that only binds Catholics).
September 23rd, 2007 at 2:31 pm
What I meant was that the Church would not treat him the same way as she would a pro-abortion politician who claims to be Catholic. The Church couldn’t deny him Communion, for example, since he’s not Catholic, and the Church can’t officially censure him or make public statements about him as She could were he claiming to be Catholic.
September 23rd, 2007 at 7:16 pm
clewis,
I am sure you are not meaning to say anything opposed to the Church’s teaching, so don’t think I’m trying to attack you personally. But I do think your language is incorrect.
The Church can’t “deny” him Communion only because he’s not able to receive in the first place, of course…
But I do think the Church can censure him and make public statements about him.
He can’t be excommunicated (a Canonical penalty) because he’s not in communion to begin with. But why can’t the Church make statements about him?
It’s only issues of prudence and civil law that stop the Church.
Is it written somewhere that the Church can’t make public statements about the reprehensible behavior of non-Catholics? What about Nero? Hitler?
September 23rd, 2007 at 8:24 pm
You missed the key phrase at the end of my comment: “as She could were he claiming to be Catholic.”
My purpose was to point out that STM Society, which is Catholic in leadership, is open to all denominations (or lacks thereof) and I thought it was important to point out that Governor Barnes does not claim Catholicism as his faith, so the “attitude” for lack of a better term is different that someone like John Kerry or Nancy Pelosi who loudly proclaim that they are Catholic and also pro-abortion. I see a much bigger problem with these two, who essentially are telling the world that you can be a “good Catholic” and yet also disagree with the Church on core moral teachings. Perhaps it would have been better for me to say, “Barnes isn’t Catholic, so he doesn’t see himself as bound by the Church’s teachings.” But even that has its limits, because clearly Kerry and Pelosi are Catholic (in their minds, anyway) and also don’t see themselves as bound by the Church’s teachings.
The whole thing I was trying to get across was simply to clarify that Barnes is neither Catholic nor does he claim to be.
September 24th, 2007 at 12:18 pm
“…the Atlanta lawyer group faces the same dilemma as Catholic colleges.”
And will continue to be a “dilemma” until they crave sanctity more than attention.
September 24th, 2007 at 9:08 pm
Perhaps the organization’s representatives should read a bit more about their patron, a man who gave up his political office and later his life entirely on the basis of moral precepts.
September 24th, 2007 at 10:09 pm
clewis,
Thanks for clarifying
.
September 25th, 2007 at 9:23 pm
Melody, regrettably, an earlier letter to the editor on this subject talked about how St. Thomas More was a reluctant martyr didn’t like the Pope. See that letter here:
http://georgiabulletin.org/local/2007/09/13/letter3/
September 25th, 2007 at 9:38 pm
[...] Due to the popularity of the post regarding Abp. Gregory (of Atlanta) and his decision not to attend the St. Thomas More society’s awards luncheon, at which pro-abortion former Georgia Governor Roy Barnes is to be honored, I am posting here all articles on the subject, since the Georgia Bulletin’s website has now been updated. [...]
September 27th, 2007 at 5:58 pm
Thank all of you for your enlightening comments. Some of them are accurate, some less so.
As the individual who made the award presentation to Governor Barnes on behalf of the STM Board, I need to correct some inaccuracies. First,the STM Society is open only to Attorneys who are practicing Catholics, not to all attorneys.
Second the STM Award is not a lifetime acheivement award, an endorsement of an individual’s political views, nor as a canonization of the individual. The Award is intended to illuminate and call attention to certain specific acts of courage, leadership, and integrity in the face of difficult circumstances which would make a less morally-acceptable course more attractive. It is the ACTS that we celebrate, not the Actors.
There are two ACTS by Governor Barnes’ which we believe deserve illumination and praise and that are worthy of emulation. The first was his decision to remove the racist symbol which had been inserted in Georgia’s flag in 1956 to announce the State’s defiance of federal de-segreagation efforts. This was an act of courage that he knew might cost him his re-election (and it did). It was an offical ACT telling all Georgians that we no longer will tolerate any form of racism, a sin which denies the equal human dignity of all persons.
The Second ACT was Governor Barnes’ decision after leaving office to eschew the high-priced law firms to represent poor people for free at Atlanta Legal Aid, and thereafter opened a consumer law-firm where 10% of all lawyers’ time is dedicated to the poor. Governor Barnes didn’t just wring his hand and talk about Christ’s preference for the poor. He ACTED upon it.
The STM Board most definietely did not make any award decision to gain publicity. Nor did Michael Sullivan insult Archbishop Gregory, whom we all honor, respect and for whom we have great affection by stating or even implying that Archbishop Gregory acted out of anything other than his own good conscience in deciding not to attend the Awards Luncheon. These are false judgments of our motives and our meanings. They are judgements that are offensive, and unworthy of the writer (but then there are several remarks printed here where the writers are quick to judge us –and ignore Christ’s warning that they will be judged according to the same judgement that they pronounce upon us). What Michael Sullivan was saying was that a small loud minority of persons who apparently believe that opposition to abortion is the ONLY requirement for an “authentic” Catholic, have acted in a high-handed and deceitful, manner which revealed their lack of charity toward Governor Barnes, their fellow Catholics and our Society whose efforts through these awards are to increase Christ’s light in the world by shining certain public attention upon the good, corageous, morally laudable actions of the award recipients –holding those particular actions up as examples for the rest of us to follow. I would ask the critics here: Have YOU done as much as Mr. Barnes to combat racism in your communities? Have YOU done as much as he has done to provide justice to the poor? Or is your opposition to abortion (as correct as it is) the sole example of the authenticity of your faith?
When we made the award decision we were not cognizant of Governor Barnes’ change in his position on “pro life” vs. “pro choice.” Contrary to the writer who apparently claims omniscience his stance on abourtion wasn’t particularly well known. He never introduced or signed legislation assisting abortion efforts.
The writer is correct that all human beings are required to follow the natural law, as their conscience understands it. That Governor Barnes, who comes from a Methodist tradition, understands the moral law differently is not surprising. The Methodist Church has not condemned abortion as cateorically as we Catholics have, and its teachings allow exceptions to the categorical condemnation of abortion. Roy Barnes’ apparent beliefs are thus consistent with his understanding of the natural or moral law as explained by his Church. We disagree with his understnading. Our disagreement is premised upon our acceptance of the teachings of the Catholic Church. Nevertheless, as strongly as we disagree with Governor Barnes’ views on the subject we are not willing to condemn his soul or his person. this is because, as the Catechism of the Catholic Church explains, all indiviuals are commanded by God to act in a manner that is consistent with their consciences, informed by their faith.
Our STM Board members are resolutely Catholic. Our consciences are informed the the teachings and traditions of the Roman Catholic Church. Because of this we are committed to the protection of life at all stages, from conception to death. We live that conviction in the example of our lives.
Unlike some of the writers who have presumed to judge us (along with Mr. Barnes), we do not arrogate to ourselves the function of judging the consciences of other persons of other faiths.
Today at the Red Mass we prayed that the Holy Spirit would bestow His grace upon the judciary, the lawyers, and the award reciients. We asked that He gift them with prudence, wisdom, courage and integrity. We also pray to the Holy Spirit that he will include our critics and us within His grace.
Michael Caldwell
September 27th, 2007 at 8:56 pm
For my part, I will clarify the comment Mr. Caldwell states I was incorrect on. I stated that the society is “open” to folks of different faiths. That statement was based on my misinterpretation of the following sentence made by Mr. Caldwell in his editorial response in the Georgia Bulletin:
“We invite judges—the overwhelming majority of whom are non-Catholics—and attorneys and other guests of various faiths.”
What I should have said was that the luncheon is open to all faiths (but is invitation-only), because that’s what the sentence says – not that membership is open to other faiths.
As for the rest of it, I can understand the society’s position, although I am concerned with putting social issues on the same plane as life issues.
September 29th, 2007 at 10:40 pm
It is strange that Mr. Caldwell said that the awards were for ACTS and not ACTORS, but wasn’t the award actually presented to the ACTORS. As a Georgian I do not miss the former flag, however, I do miss all those children who should have lived to see the new one…