Has the Catholic Church signaled that Obama is acceptable?

In my dailykos reading yesterday I encountered a diary that should not have been overlooked.  By 8ackgr0und N015e, it was entitled The Audacity of the Pope: A Message of Hope!. The diarist does a detailed examination of the encyclical the Pope issued for his pastoral visit to the United States, including a link to a video of the Pope reading his message, a message repeated in the homily at Nationals' Stadium in DC.   And that got me thinking. Join me below the fold for the results of my cogitation.
Sen. Bob Casey, like his father before him, is a devout Roman Catholic.  It is hard to imagine that he would ever do anything in his public life that would create tension between him and the Catholic Church.   And to some degree he is a very important politician to the Catholic Church.  It is hard to imagine that he would be so vociferously an advocate of the Obama candidacy were that candidacy not at least acceptable to the Catholic hierarchy.

And Benedict XVI is a very smart man.  And his advisors are certainly aware of some of the controversy the Church endured from words and actions by some bishops towards John Kerry in the 2004 campaign.  Thus it is noteworthy that the invitation to the Papal mass in DC went to ALL Catholic members of Congress, that Kerry announced his intention to take communion (which he did).  Thus as I read the words of the encyclical, noting the number of times the word "hope" is repeated, not just in the 3-word phrase "Christ our hope" which provides a basis for talking about hope, and as I then thought about Casey's role in the campaign, I had to wonder whether the encyclical and the Senator's involvement indicates at least acceptance if not tacit approval of the candidacy of Barack Obama?

Let me quote from the diary from yesterday to which I alluded:

Together with your bishops, I have chosen as a theme of this journey three simple, but essential words...Christ Our Hope.

The fact this theme was chosen in consultation with the American bishops is a signal that this is what they think is most important and relevant to their flock at this moment.  But the Pope does more than signal his intentions.  He emphasizes his main point.  

I shall also bring the message of Christian Hope to the great assembly of the United Nations, to the representatives of all the peoples of the world.  Indeed, the world has greater need of Hope than ever. Hope for peace, for justice and freedom.  But this Hope can never be fulfilled without obedience to the law of God which Christ brought to fulfillment in the commandment to "Love one another."

Bear with me on this.  I am not and never have been a Catholic.   And to be certain, the idea of hope is certainly a key part of the Catholic message.  Thus it is POSSIBLE that the emphasis on the word "hope" is merely coincidence.  It is also possible that it is something more.

Both Democrats are pro-choice, and yet it is likely that one will be the next president, given the mood of the nation, and despite the recent nastiness of the campaign.  Could it be that the Church believes that Obama's willingness to address a large number of issues of economic equity and the like which are also an important part of Church teaching could play a part?  Could it be that Obama's words that "abortion is never a good thing" is more in keeping with the Church's view than is the "safe, legal and rare" offered by Clinton?

I do not presume to know the mind nor the intentions of those who lead the Roman Catholic Church.  I have no idea if this message from the Pope has already been widely communicated to American Catholics, or if it or something like it is to be communicated today, whether in Pennsylvania or nation wide.  Certainly it would be appropriate for churches to hear the message of the Holy Father.  And if the message of hope, especially if that word is repeated as it is in the video, were to be heard as at least a tacit acceptance of Obama's candidacy, that could have profound effects in a state that as of 2006 was 26.4% Catholic, the seventh highest (Illinois is 6th, at 29.9%, CT 4th at 38,7;  the other heavy states are RI, MA, NJ and NY, all won by Clinton).  After all, were even part of the white Catholic vote to be turned from Clinton to Obama, that makes it far more possible for Obama to win the state, and much more probable that even a Clinton win would be far narrower than anticipated by some such as Chris Matthews and Mark Shields or as was indicated by the SUSA poll.  Certainly we all knew that Casey's endorsement would give Obama some boost among white Catholics, given his stature with that group.   But will the result be more than nominal?

I will be curious if anyone hears all or part of the Pope's message at Church today, or if there is any other message which might be considered a communication about the forthcoming primary.  If you have anything to report, please share it.   And of course I will be very interested to see what the exit polling shows on Tuesday, and before then, anything from cross-tabs of polling done this afternoon, after people have attended Church.

This may all be a coincidence.  Even if intended, it may mean little or have almost no effect.

But I thought, after reading the diary from yesterday, it was worth at least a mention.

Peace

Comments