The Manhattan Declaration represents a turning point in the ongoing battle for the soul of America. It is first time in my lifetime where so many Christian church leaders have come together and declared themselves open combatants against all earthly powers that oppose one of the primary tenants of the Christian faith: the right to natural life.

Heretofore, with the exception of the Roman Catholic episcopacy, whose opposition was sometimes aggressive, but too often tepid and confusing, the Christian leaders that America looks to for moral guidance, stood idly by while their faithful looked more and more to societal forces for moral guidance while their self-aggrandizing, weak-kneed Christian leaders stood idly by; overcome with bewildered amazement at how their people were deserting them.

Now of a sudden, by the grace of God, these same weak-kneed leaders have declared war, by signing this document, on all the societal forces and earthly powers that opposed this most basic tenant of the Christian faith, the God-given human right to natural life

These two statements clearly show how profound the newfound strength is of our nation’s Christian leadership:
“We will not be intimidated into silence or acquiescence or the violation of our consciences by any power on earth, be it cultural or political, regardless of the consequences to ourselves.”

and

“We will fully and ungrudgingly render to Caesar what is Caesar’s. But under no circumstances will we render to Caesar what is God’s.”

Now it is time for us to stand up and be counted with our Christian leaders.

Read the excellent essay by Sandro Magister that explains the Manhattan Declaration very well. Please let the rest of the world know if you agree or disagree with what he writes or the little bit that I have just written.

Yours truly

The “Manhattan Declaration”: The Manifesto That’s Shaking America

It’s been endorsed by Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox leaders, united in defending life and the family. With the White House in the crosshairs. In Europe, they would’ve branded it political “interference” by the Church

by Sandro Magister

ROMA, November 25, 2009 – On the other side of the Atlantic, the news passed almost without notice: the news about a strong public appeal in defense of life, of marriage, of religious freedom and objection of conscience, launched jointly – a rarity – by top-level representatives of the Catholic Church, the Orthodox Churches, the Anglican Communion, and the Evangelical communities of the United States.

Among the religious leaders who presented the appeal to the public on Friday, November 20, at the National Press Club in Washington (in the photo), were the archbishop of Philadelphia, Cardinal Justin Rigali, the archbishop of Washington, Donald W. Wuerl, and the bishop of Denver, Charles J. Chaput.

And among the 52 first signatories of the appeal were 11 other Catholic archbishops and bishops of the United States: Cardinal Adam Maida of Detroit, Timothy Dolan of New York, John J. Myers of Newark, John Nienstedt of Saint Paul and Minneapolis, Joseph F. Naumann of Kansas City, Joseph E. Kurtz of Louisville, Thomas J. Olmsted of Phoenix, Michael J. Sheridan of Colorado Springs, Salvatore J. Cordileone of Oakland, Richard J. Malone of Portland, and David A. Zubik of Pittsburgh.

The 4700-word appeal is entitled “Manhattan Declaration: A Call of Christian Conscience,” and takes its name from the area of New York in which its publication was discussed and decided last September.

The final drafting of the text was entrusted to Robert P. George, a Catholic professor of law at Princeton University, and to Evangelical Protestants Chuck Colson and Timothy George, the latter a professor at the Beeson Divinity School at Samford University in Birmingham, Alabama.

The other signers include Metropolitan Jonah Paffhausen, primate of the Orthodox Church in America, archpriest Chad Hatfield of the Orthodox seminary of Saint Vladimir, Reverend William Owens, president of the Coalition of African-American Pastors, and two leading figures of the Anglican Communion: Robert Wm. Duncan, primate of the Anglican Church in North America, and Peter J. Akinola, primate of the Anglican Church in Nigeria.

Apart from the bishops, the other Catholics who signed the appeal include Jesuit Fr. Joseph D. Fessio, a disciple of Joseph Ratzinger and founder of the publisher Ignatius Press, William Donohue, president of the Catholic League, Jody Bottum, editor of the magazine “First Things,” and George Weigel, a senior fellow of the Ethics and Public Policy Center.

The “Manhattan Declaration” has not emerged in a vacuum, but at a critical moment for American society and politics: precisely while the administration of Barack Obama is pushing hard for passage of a health care reform plan in the United States.

Defending life from the moment of conception and the right to objections of conscience, the appeal contests two of the points endangered by the reform project currently under discussion in the Senate.

In Congress, the danger was averted thanks in part to aggressive lobbying conducted openly by the Catholic episcopate. After the final vote had guaranteed both the right to objections of conscience and the blocking of any public financing for abortion, the bishops’ conference hailed this result as a “success.” But now the battle has started all over again in the Senate, on a working document that the Church again considers unacceptable. The bishops’ conference has already sent the senators a letter indicating the changes it would like to see made to all of the points in dispute.

But now there is also the ecumenical “Manhattan Declaration,” the last chapter of which, entitled “Unjust Laws,” ends with this solemn statement:

“We will not be intimidated into silence or acquiescence or the violation of our consciences by any power on earth, be it cultural or political, regardless of the consequences to ourselves.”

And immediately afterward:

“We will fully and ungrudgingly render to Caesar what is Caesar’s. But under no circumstances will we render to Caesar what is God’s.”

In an initial passage, the appeal also says this:

“While public opinion has moved in a pro-life direction, powerful and determined forces are working to expand abortion, embryo-destructive research, assisted suicide, and euthanasia.”

And it is true. According to the most recent surveys, public opinion in the United States is shifting noticeably toward greater defense of the life of the unborn child.

From 1995 to 2008, all of the research had shown that more people were pro-choice than pro-life, with a significant margin between them: the former at 49 percent, the latter at 42.

Now, instead, the positions have been reversed. The pro-choice have fallen to 46 percent, and the pro-life have risen to 47 percent, overtaking them.

The religious leaders who are pressuring Obama on the minefield of abortion, of homosexual marriage, of euthanasia, therefore know that they have with them a large and growing segment of American society.

The issuing of the “Manhattan Declaration” has received extensive coverage in the media in the United States, without anyone protesting against this political “interference” by the Churches.

But that’s just the way it is in the United States. There has always been a rigorous separation between religion and the state there. There are no concordats, and they’re not even conceivable. But this is exactly why the Churches are seen as having the freedom to speak and act in the public sphere.

In Europe, the landscape is very different. Here “secularism” is understood and applied in conflict, either latent or explicit, with the Churches.

This may be another reason for the silence that in Europe, in Italy, in Rome, greeted the “Manhattan Declaration.” It is held to be a typically American phenomenon, foreign to the European way of thinking.

A similar difference in approach concerns the denial of Eucharistic communion for pro-abortion Catholic politicians. In the United States, this controversy is extremely heated, while on the other side of the Atlantic it isn’t. This difference in sensibilities also divides the hierarchy of the Catholic Church: in Europe and in Rome the question is practically ignored, left to the individual conscience.

But it most be noted out that something is changing on this point, even on the Old Continent. And not only because there is a pope like Benedict XVI, who has stated that he prefers the American model of relations between Church and state.

A sign of this came a few days ago from Spain, where the Catholic Church is grappling with an ideologically hostile government, that of José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, which is preparing a law that would liberalize abortion even more than it is now.

According to reports from sources including “L’Osservatore Romano,” the secretary general of the Spanish bishops’ conference, Bishop Juan Antonio Martínez Camino, did not hesitate to advise Catholic politicians that, if they vote in favor of the law, they will not be admitted to Eucharistic communion, because they will have placed themselves in an objective situation of “public sin.”

Not only that. Bishop Martínez Camino added that those who maintain that it is morally legitimate to kill an unborn child put themselves in contradiction with the Catholic Church, and thus risk falling into heresy and into “latae sententiae,’ or automatic, excommunication.

It is the first time that words so “American” have been heard from the leadership of a bishops’ conference in Europe.

But let’s get back to the “Manhattan Declaration.” The complete text, with a list of the first 152 signers, is on this web page:

> Manhattan Declaration: A Call of Christian Conscience

The following is the abbreviated text, released together with the complete text of the “Declaration”:

Manhattan Declaration Executive Summary

November 20, 2009

Christians, when they have lived up to the highest ideals of their faith, have defended the weak and vulnerable and worked tirelessly to protect and strengthen vital institutions of civil society, beginning with the family.

We are Orthodox, Catholic, and evangelical Christians who have united at this hour to reaffirm fundamental truths about justice and the common good, and to call upon our fellow citizens, believers and non-believers alike, to join us in defending them. These truths are (1) the sanctity of human life, (2) the dignity of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife, and (3) the rights of conscience and religious liberty. Inasmuch as these truths are foundational to human dignity and the well-being of society, they are inviolable and non-negotiable. Because they are increasingly under assault from powerful forces in our culture, we are compelled today to speak out forcefully in their defense, and to commit ourselves to honoring them fully no matter what pressures are brought upon us and our institutions to abandon or compromise them. We make this commitment not as partisans of any political group but as followers of Jesus Christ, the crucified and risen Lord, who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.

Human Life

The lives of the unborn, the disabled, and the elderly are ever more threatened. While public opinion has moved in a pro-life direction, powerful and determined forces are working to expand abortion, embryo-destructive research, assisted suicide, and euthanasia. Although the protection of the weak and vulnerable is the first obligation of government, the power of government is today often enlisted in the cause of promoting what Pope John Paul II called “the culture of death.” We pledge to work unceasingly for the equal protection of every innocent human being at every stage of development and in every condition. We will refuse to permit ourselves or our institutions to be implicated in the taking of human life and we will support in every possible way those who, in conscience, take the same stand.

Marriage

The institution of marriage, already wounded by promiscuity, infidelity and divorce, is at risk of being redefined and thus subverted. Marriage is the original and most important institution for sustaining the health, education, and welfare of all. Where marriage erodes, social pathologies rise. The impulse to redefine marriage is a symptom, rather than the cause, of the erosion of the marriage culture. It reflects a loss of understanding of the meaning of marriage as embodied in our civil law as well as our religious traditions. Yet it is critical that the impulse be resisted, for yielding to it would mean abandoning the possibility of restoring a sound understanding of marriage and, with it, the hope of rebuilding a healthy marriage culture. It would lock into place the false and destructive belief that marriage is all about romance and other adult satisfactions, and not, in any intrinsic way, about the unique character and value of acts and relationships whose meaning is shaped by their aptness for the generation, promotion and protection of life. Marriage is not a “social construction,” but is rather an objective reality – the covenantal union of husband and wife – that it is the duty of the law to recognize, honor, and protect.

Religious Liberty

Freedom of religion and the rights of conscience are gravely jeopardized. The threat to these fundamental principles of justice is evident in efforts to weaken or eliminate conscience protections for healthcare institutions and professionals, and in anti-discrimination statutes that are used as weapons to force religious institutions, charities, businesses, and service providers either to accept (and even facilitate) activities and relationships they judge to be immoral, or go out of business. Attacks on religious liberty are dire threats not only to individuals, but also to the institutions of civil society including families, charities, and religious communities. The health and well-being of such institutions provide an indispensable buffer against the overweening power of government and is essential to the flourishing of every other institution – including government itself – on which society depends.

Unjust Laws

As Christians, we believe in law and we respect the authority of earthly rulers. We count it as a special privilege to live in a democratic society where the moral claims of the law on us are even stronger in virtue of the rights of all citizens to participate in the political process. Yet even in a democratic regime, laws can be unjust. And from the beginning, our faith has taught that civil disobedience is required in the face of gravely unjust laws or laws that purport to require us to do what is unjust or otherwise immoral. Such laws lack the power to bind in conscience because they can claim no authority beyond that of sheer human will.

Therefore, let it be known that we will not comply with any edict that compels us or the institutions we lead to participate in or facilitate abortions, embryo-destructive research, assisted suicide, euthanasia, or any other act that violates the principle of the profound, inherent, and equal dignity of every member of the human family.

Further, let it be known that we will not bend to any rule forcing us to bless immoral sexual partnerships, treat them as marriages or the equivalent, or refrain from proclaiming the truth, as we know it, about morality, marriage, and the family.

Further, let it be known that we will not be intimidated into silence or acquiescence or the violation of our consciences by any power on earth, be it cultural or political, regardless of the consequences to ourselves.

We will fully and ungrudgingly render to Caesar what is Caesar’s. But under no circumstances will we render to Caesar what is God’s.

__________

The official website of the “Manhattan Declaration,” with the possibility of signing it:

> manhattandeclaration.org

__________

The letter of November 20, 2009, from the United States bishops’ conference to the senators, on the health system reform bill:

> “Dear Senator…”

Accompanied by a reminder on the previous discussion in Congress:

> “What does the Stupak amendment really do?”

__________

The Gallup/USA Today study on pro-life attitudes, which in 2009 have overtaken the pro-choice:

> U.S. Abortion Attitudes Closely Divided

__________

On the criticisms of the Obama administration from the American Catholic hierarchy, and divergences with the curia of Rome:

> The Bishop’s Ax Falls on Obama. And on the Vatican Curia (8.10.2009)

__________

On the granting or withholding of communion for pro-abortion Catholic politicians, and on the comment in this regard written in 2004 by then cardinal Joseph Ratzinger:

> Obama’s Pick for Vice President Is Catholic. But the Bishops Deny Him Communion (27.8.2008)

> An American Dispute: Should Communion Be Given to Pro-abortion Catholic Politicians? (2.5.2008)

> The Kerry Affair: What Ratzinger Wanted from the American Bishops (3.7.2004)

> Ratzinger-Kerry, Act II. The Well-Tempered Controversy (13.7.2004)

__________

English translation by Matthew Sherry, Ballwin, Missouri, U.S.A.

__________
25.11.2009

Source: www.chiesa

Related articles by Zemanta

• Your Thoughts on Kennedy’s Tiff With His Bishop (usnews.com)
• Why He Signed (palamas.info)
• Benedict Strives for Ecumenical Mark (online.wsj.com)
• Catholic church to receive Anglicans (guardian.co.uk)
• Pope in battle for soul of two churches (guardian.co.uk)
• LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report 10/3/09 (deaconforlife.blogspot.com)
• Back to basics for the church | HE Baber (guardian.co.uk)
• Theocracy: Imposing Faith into Politics in the US and Abroad (lafiga.firedoglake.com)
• In China, a colossal leap of faith (nationalpost.com)
• Pope Approves Plan to Allow Anglicans Into the Fold (nytimes.com)
• Catholic, Orthodox and Evangelical Christian leaders sign Manhattan Declaration (liveactivecultures.net)
• Politics, Polemics and Reconcilation (palamas.info)
• Convenient Christianity (The American Taliban) (drumsnwhistles.com)
• Lesbian ordination divides Anglicans (guardian.co.uk)
• LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report 12/7/09 (deaconforlife.blogspot.com)

Related posts:

1. Texas Straight Talk
2. Governor Bobby Jindal on Christianity

Foolish, incongruous, absurd, it is all of these and more

political files

Not interested?

Some people feign disinterest in politics, saying all politicians are liars and cheats and you can’t believe a word they say, so what’s the use in paying attention to something I can’t help or change. Timothy Geithner could be the poster boy for all the people that think that way. I agree that some politicians are little else than self-serving liars and cheats: some, but not all.

Truth and politics

If a politician told the voters the truth and nothing but the truth; no one, including their mothers would vote for them—okay, maybe their mothers would. That is the reason politicians endeavor to say as little that is substantive as possible. The 1964 presidential race was an excellent example of my point.

Politics and what politicians vote for and against has a profound affect on our lives whether we like it or not; therefore, it behooves us to pay attention and try to make a difference. If we try hard enough we will make a difference and the difference we make may have a totally unexpected and perhaps disproportionate affect on the quality of life of you and a lot of other people.

Our very own tax cheater at our service

Now here is what started me on this little tirade. In the last few days I read about the latest righteous talk to come out of the mouth of a tax cheat name, Timothy Geithner, about tax cheats. Talk about the fox guarding the henhouse. That act easily beat the little fox guarding the henhouse anecdote.

Why, oh, why did our nation’s president ask Timothy Geithner, the Treasury Secretary to talk about tax cheats during his overseas tax-plan announcement a day or so ago?

Here’s a little snippet from that presentation from the cheater himself: Today we are taking another important step toward . . . ending indefensible tax breaks and loopholes which allow some companies and some well-off citizens to evade the rules that the rest of America lives by.

Really? Let’s go back a little way and take a look at Geithner’s “non-answer” answer to a simple question posed by Sen. Jim Bunning during Geithner’s confirmation hearing.

Senator Bunning: Would you have paid your 2001 and 2002 tax had you not been nominated to be the treasury secretary?

Geithner: Senator, as I said initially, I should have asked more questions when I concluded that audit at the time, and I didn’t. When I think back on that, I regret not having done that. But I should have done it at that point.

You may recall that Geithner was working at the IMF when he dodged his taxes. The IMF itself is a tax haven. The income is tax-free. All you need to do is pay your payroll taxes, which is precisely what he failed to do until he was nominated back in December.

Clearly, the liar and tax cheat Timothy Geithner is not the guy to be talking about tax evasion. As Treasury secretary, Mr. Geithner is the individual charged with overseeing the IRS, and he is the man who was guilty of a multi-year delay in paying his taxes. Some people are speculating that Mr. Geithner won’t be around very long as Treasury Secretary. Let’s hope they are right.

Foolish, incongruous, absurd; all of these and more

Mr. Obama demonstrated very poor judgment in using Geithner for this particular attack. One can only wonder why he chose this man for the task of talking about tax cheats. Maybe Mr. Obama thought who better than a tax cheat to talk about tax cheats.

No, I don’t really suppose the president was thinking that way, but still I wonder why on earth he insisted on seeing Geithner’s nomination through in light of all the factual evidence against the man. Another question, of course, would be why he was confirmed by our representatives in Washington?

We should all raise our voices in our own way to get this man completely out of our government at the earliest possible time. Doing this or not doing it may well have a far reaching affect on our collective wellbeing and happiness.

Related articles by Zemanta

• When It Comes to Taxes, More Americans Say, ‘Pay up’ (abcnews.go.com)
• Geithner’s Tax Problems ‘Far More Egregious’ Than Daschle’s (crooksandliars.com)
• Geithner’s tax troubles irk even the IRS agents (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• Your Money: How to Avoid a Tom Daschle Tax Problem (nytimes.com)
• Administration Rolls Out New Tax-Shelter Curbs (crooksandliars.com)
• Newsweek Interviewing Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner Live on Facebook Today (insidefacebook.com)
• Sound Off With Your Thoughts About the Geithner Put Today On Facebook (allfacebook.com)
• Christopher Brauchli: Taxes and Didactics (huffingtonpost.com)
• Tax Tips for Tim Geithner (time.com)
• Geithner is the Wrong Messenger (kudlowsmoneypolitics.blogspot.com)

No related posts.