RSS Feed MenuThe passing of Richard John Neuhaus comes at a crucial time for the Catholic Right.
The very idea of practicing, orthodox Catholics as a political movement and the key swing vote in the New (old?) Majority is fracturing. The project of RJN and Michael Novak, and their sometime mentor John Courtney Murray, was to engage with the political culture in a non-revolutionary, non-reactionary, uniquely American way. That project is not being taken on with gusto by the conservative Catholic thinkers of the blogosphere, who by and large tend to reach back a couple of generations for inspiration, to Tolkien, Chesterton and Hilaire Belloc. The voice of a John Zmirak or a Mark Shea reflects that influence: more biting, more satirical and despairing in tone; more pacifistic and separatist in viewpoint.
And why not? You can’t say that RJN didn’t warn us; the question of “moral assent to the regime,” explored in the symposium “The End Of Democracy?” remains as the question asked by Catholic political writers. However, the question has expanded beyond the “judicial usurpation of politics” explored in the symposium. The question of moral assent is asked about executive authority in the War on Terror, the moral legitimacy of said war, and more importantly for our purposes, Catholic participation in the two-party system.
Abortion policy is a factor. Explore a site like Mark Shea’s blog, and you will find the usual complaints about the Republican Party allegedly doing nothing for pro-lifers for these last thirty-six years. From the outside, it can seem like a People’s Front for Judea mentality at times: “Besides the Hyde Amendment, the blocking of the Freedom of Choice Act, the Mexico City policy, the partial-birth abortion ban, the executive ban on embryonic stem-cell research, the repeated vetoes on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, the occasional state-level restrictions on abortion and the judicial support of same, and the access to federal courts given to Terry Schiavo’s parents, what have they given us in return?” And yet… the People’s Front for Judea were right that it was still bad to be ruled by a Caesar, and the pro-lifers are right that it is still bad to be ruled by an Anthony Kennedy.
Don’t think it’s just about abortion, though. If Roe Vs. Wade was overturned by Bush-appointed Supreme Court justices, Catholic writers would not suddenly give their full assent to the enhanced interrogations program, or the Iraq invasion, or the bailout, or the Republican Party. Do you really want them to?
One more quick point: Richard John Neuhaus was beloved by Catholics, but he was never quite writing for ordinary Catholics. He followed the call of the Second Vatican Council to reach out to the world, and he did so brilliantly. What’s next is for those outside and inside the Church, who loved RJN, and want to counter the influence of the Buchanans and Sobrans that he spoke out against in his lifetime, to reach out to Catholics.
joemarier // Jan 21, 2009 at 10:35 am
Incidentally, Mark Shea’s website is markshea.blogspot.com, and I have a great deal of respect for him and his commenters and readers, even when I disagree. John Zmirak can be found everywhere.
joemarier // Jan 21, 2009 at 10:40 am
Incidentally, Mark Shea’s website is markshea.blogspot.com, and I have a great deal of respect for him and his commenters and readers, even when I disagree. John Zmirak can be found everywhere.
joemarier // Jan 21, 2009 at 10:42 am
Incidentally, Mark Shea’s website is markshea.blogspot.com, and I have a great deal of respect for him and his commenters and readers, even when I disagree. John Zmirak can be found everywhere.
jmshendricks // Jan 21, 2009 at 11:36 am
I don’t understand why Neuhaus is classified as a conservative. He was against the Vietnam War and as far as I know never repented of this. Being against abortion does not make you a conservative.
The Catholic Church is not a politically conservative institution, quite the opposite, and those who give JPII much credit for the end of communism are off base. The Catholic Church as a whole has generally been neutral on communism, opposed only to the extent its privileges are curtailed. Some orders of the church are pro-communist.
joemarier // Jan 21, 2009 at 11:58 am
Thanks, for the comment, JMS! I’d happily respond point by point to your contentions, but It would be rather long and complicated and unrelated to my article. I’ll probably be touching on them in the future, though.
joemarier // Jan 21, 2009 at 12:02 pm
I have a quick clarification! By “restrictions”, I meant “regulations that have the effect of reducing abortions, like parental notification laws and suchlike”. Restrictions, are, of course, banned under Roe vs. Wade.
mmarteen // Jan 21, 2009 at 7:37 pm
I think you underestimate RJN’s influence on ordinary Catholics. He made a lot of connections through the pro-life movement even before he converted in 1990. I am talking about the grass roots pro-life movement leading up to and immediately after Roe v. Wade which was really just evangelical and catholic housewives, some without education, hardly a bunch of elites.
And you seem to miss something essential here. It’s not so much that the Pro-life movement is unhappy that they have not gotten everything they have wanted, it’s that all along, despite whatever restrictions or regulations have been placed, there has always been this looming threat of a FOCA type law which would make Abortion not just permissible but an inalienable right. It’s one thing when Abortion is allowed. It’s quite another when the state promotes abortion, doesn’t allow dissent or exception and forces us all to be complicit, through our tax dollars and in our hospitals. Ed Morrissey has pointed out that it would have the effect of making American catholics participate in an excommunicable offense. This is new and different and orthodox catholics are already taking note.
joemarier // Jan 30, 2009 at 1:58 pm
Mmarteen, I wish I had seen your comment a lot sooner. It’s excellent, and a fair cop. Yes, perhaps I do underestimate his influence; I know him largely through First Things, which I find to be quite intellectually challenging, rather than through what he did in person (alas). The rest of your comment I don’t have a problem with, either.