The uproar in the Church

Although I was raised as a Roman Catholic, I think that I'm best described as lapsed. I disagree with many of the Church's political positions, vehemently disagree with the Church's handling of the pedophilia scandal (and know one of the parish priests involved), and rarely attend Mass. According to this article, at least some seminarians (priests in training) would say I'm no longer, in fact, Catholic. Being an American and believing in the value of debate and public discourse, I don't buy that, particularly from a church that if picking and choosing which political issues to become strident about.

I'm of the bent of Fr. Andrew Greeley, who questions the validty of the "pro-life" movement because it condemns abortion, but not the death penalty or fighting unjust wars. Especially for Catholics who are accused by the heirarchy of being "cafeteria" Catholics this is a big issue, because it exposes the hypocrisy inherent in the positions of those like Bishop Michael Sheridan and others who say that politicians and voters who stray from the Chruch's teachings should be denied the Sacraments. To me it seems to be the pot calling kettle black.

For the gentlemen of the hierarchy to say that abortion, same-sex marriage, and stem-cell research are the ultimate evil, but that the death penalty is not, when the Mother Chruch teaches that all of those are wrong is for them to cherry-pick the teachings of the Church to their own benefit. It seems to me that they are casting stones without looking to themselves first.

The whole uproar leaves me wondering several things:

1. If the Sierra Club lost its tax-exempt status for political advocacy, why hasn't the Catholic Church? Suddenly making these stands against Democrats that are pro-choice, but not against the Republicans (Tom Ridge and Rudy Giuliani) with those same views is most definitely political in nature.

2. Why is it ok for the hierarchy to pick and choose the important bits of the Bible, but not the rest of us? This is a key component of the Reformation and the subsequent Council of Trent, where the Church stated that the only people able to interpret the Bible are the Holy Fathers. Does this mean the Bishops get to decide that the only "important" parts of Leviticus are the strictures against male homosexuality and bestiality and leave out the business about shellfish, crops, multi-fiber clothing, daughters disobeying fathers, etc...

3. Where does this put me? I'm conflicted about abortion, for extremely limited use of the death penalty, for regulated stem-cell research, and accept the doctrine of just war (which is not what we are fighting right now).