This from the Cleveland Plain Dealer:
An 86-year-old nun from Cleveland who works for a Catholic anti-poverty lobbying group has been selected to deliver the closing prayers one night during the Democratic National Convention.
"I think you have a different perspective when you've lived some history," says Catherine Pinkerton, a member of the Cleveland-based religious order Congregation of St. Joseph who once served as principal of the West Side secondary school it founded, St. Joseph Academy.
Pinkerton says that she has never been an activist for either political party but that she admires Barack Obama's "vision of where we stand as a nation and where we stand among nations" and agreed to deliver the benediction at the request of his campaign.
For the past 24 years, Pinkerton has worked for Network, a national Catholic social-justice lobby in Washington, D.C., where she works to establish international trade and investment policies that benefit the United States as well as the developing world.
"We are standing at one of the critical moments of our history," says Pinkerton, who is still drafting the remarks she'll deliver in Denver on Wednesday, Aug. 27.
Obama's campaign invited a diverse group of religious leaders to offer prayers at the convention and asked Pinkerton to be among them because she's "an icon among Catholics who has really been an inspiration to women everywhere," said spokesman Tom Reynolds.
"For decades, she has been a national leader and a champion for working families," Reynolds said. "Catholics across Ohio should be proud to have one of their own taking center stage at this historic event."
Posts
39 comments:
It's good to use any forum to speak about the need to feed the poor.
Does anybody else have a problem with a Catholic agency lobbying the government? I really have a problem with that. The Church (read US) have a responsibility to care for the poor and help them not be dependent and teach them to help others as well in our service to the Lord. I give to food banks, pro-life groups and speak directly to my elected representatives in govt, but will not pay the Church to be a lobbying agency. Lobbying and voting are jobs for the faithful, not for the Church. I guess you could make a case that Sister is one of the faithful, but she represents the Church and I do not think that is what Catholic organizations are supposed to do. Anneg in NC
As long as there are lobbyists who are against life, the poor, and the family, we should have our voices involved just the same.
Am I the only Catholic offended that this woman who claims to be a Catholic nun is supporting a candidate and party that supports abortion? She is not a nun nor has ever been a nun. A nun lives in a convent in community behind a cloistered screen and does not get involved in politics. The best she can claim is that at some time in history she was a religious "sister" She is no nun!
Is it any surprise that a 'un-habited' nun is speaking?
How wonderful, if she were to add a prayer for all the aborted/murdered babies - would it not? I won't be holding my breath. But I can hope... sigh...
Amen! Let us educate the public to these feminist radicals claiming to be Catholics, let alone Catholic nuns! Where is your religious habit sister?
Yes...
She may not be a "nun" in the strictest sense of the term, but she is a religious order sister who has vowed her life to Christ and who has evidently spent much of that life seeking to advance the Catholic Church's teaching on social justice. She deserves respect, not derision.
You can read more about her order at this link.
Blessings,
Dcn. G.
Deacon Kandra:
I hold an MA Theology from Franciscan University in Steubenville. I am also in the Diaconate program in my diocese and hope to be ordained in 2010.
According to canon law this woman is not now nor has ever been a "nun" in any sense of the word. There is no such thing as the "strictest" sense as you say.
Although she has allowed herself to be described as such nationally if not internationally. I must reiterate my origional comment that at best she was at one time a lay religious sister. She does not meet the qualifications of the magesterium of a nun. I am sorry if I seem uncharitable, however, she has alighned herself with a pro-abortion candidate and political party. And she will not answer to me, or you but to Almighty God for her actions. In my diocese she would be refused Holy Communion.
God's tender mercy's..
FG
Yes...
She's a vowed religious. It is the media (including yours truly, who borrowed that noun from the newspaper article) that has characterized her as a nun.
To the best of my knowledge, this poor woman is innocent of the crime of calling herself a "nun" when she's merely a "sister."
Mea culpa.
Blessings,
Dcn. G.
While this woman is very devout and is very dedicated to her work with the poor, should it be ignored that she is from a state (Ohio) which the Democrats lost so narrowly last time and that her invitation is at least as much of an appeal to the voters of Ohio as it is the need for Democrat conventioneers to hear a prayer from a religious Catholic? How are situations like this best handled by those being asked to further the political/temporal fortunes of a man?
The following link is to a CNA article reporting on the lead McCain has with Catholics in the United States. Perhaps another reason for having a Catholic activist pray at the Democrat convention?
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=13599
And how about H.E. Charles Chaput, D.D., OFM, Archbishop of Denver? Is he not a professed religious? How come the sanctimonious Democrats choose to offend all U.S. Catholics by snubbing him? It's utterly disgraceful. No Catholic, regardless of canonical state, should in any way shape or form support B.H. Obama for President.
Interestingly, just moments ago Chaput was on EWTN's "The World Over" and he reiterated his statement that a Catholic can vote for a pro-abortion candidate if there are "proportionate" reasons to do so.
He also added that the Church leaves it up to the individual to determine what those reasons are.
Dcn. G.
It's also worth reading Chaput's reaction to the Democrats' snub.
From CNA:
"I'm happy to see they are having prayer at their sessions, and they have a right to choose whom they want to do that," he said.
Remarking about the Catholics chosen, he said, "Hopefully, they will know being Catholic is more foundational to their identity than anything else."
There you see one of many reasons why he is not only a good shepherd, but a great one.
Dcn. G.
I wonder how many vocations her order had this year? Hopefully they'll fade away soon.
Another sellout so she can get on TV---she admires the big O's vision? he cannot explain when an unborn child should have rights because it is "above his paygrade" and she thinks he is a leader? Please---his vision ends with himself in the WhiteHouse and once he is in he will forget about her and the other quislings who fauned over him rather than followed their faith
Point of order: As yet no one has shown me any examples of a "Pro-life" Republican who has accomplished anything to make abortion illegal; or even less accessible on a National level. Once again, I point out, the Pro-Life Candidates who've been elected because of their stance have been awfully quiet. I imagine if they made enough noise they would be covered at the very least by Fox (not my cup of tea) News.
Do we have a list of speakers for the Republican National Convention? Have they invited a bishop or a Religious who wears a habit to offer prayer at their show?
Wishing that a religious order fades away soon? Nice.
I'm always amazed (I don't know why...I should be used to it by now) when reading comments on a Catholic and/or Christian blog/bulletin board/chat at the amount of "unchristian" behavior. I've run into people in my professional and volunteer work with our Church who tend to forget Jesus' interactions with the Pharisees.
Maybe I'm wrong to always make sure the plank is out of my eye.
God Bless
If the voter had to choose between one candidate who this voter was certain would lead his country into a world war and who would be responsible for the deaths of tens of millions of people and a second candidate who was an active proponent of a constitutionally-based representative democracy with isolationist tendencies, but was pro-abortion, then this voter would have a "proportionate reason" to vote for the pro-abortion candidate.
This current election in this country involves a candidate about whom little is known except for his strong, unwavering support for abortion in all of its forms and in all of its circumstances and a candidate with decades of military and public service whose position on the issues relevant to this country today are a matter of public record, including his unwavering opposition to abortion.
A Catholic voter in this country today must take seriously the grave and continuous teaching of the Church against abortion and on abortion's relationship to the many social ills facing our country, including poverty and injustice. Archbishop Chaput's comments on EWTN cannot be used to rationalize one's misunderstandings, ignorance or hubris.
Wow. Here's a woman who's devoted her adult life to the Church, to education and to assisting the poor, and yet within 12 hours of the Deacon's posting, her fellow Catholics have criticized her for not wearing a habit, have said she should be refused Holy Communion, have expressed hope that her order fades away, and have called her a sellout and (my favorite) a "feminist radical" who is only "claiming" to be Catholic.
I can understand why people would object to her decision to speak at the DNC, but to do so in such an uncharitable, uncivil and (frankly) downright vicious way is wildly inappropriate. All of these points could have easily been made without resorting to personal attacks and assumptions about Ms. Pinkerton.
I believe that in a civil society it's inappropriate to speak that way about anybody, let alone a religious sister. As Catholics, such behavior is beneath us.
Like other liberals like her, she considers national and foreign policies to be therapy sessions, where the US goes to do psychoanalysis.
Meanwhile, as the US lies on the divan, she's thrilled about O's vision of the US recognizing gay "marriage" and infanticide.
If there's any comfort is that by the pictures in her order's website, she and her community as as sterile as the vision she shares with O: they'll cease to exist within a generation.
May St. Rose pray for us.
This is sick and sad and a slap in the face to the 51 million humans slaughtered.
I hope that she will use this as an opportunity to BLOW THE DOORS WIDE OPEN on the atrocities being committed by the DEMOCRATIC PARTY to "relieve" the city of all these "unsightly" homeless people. Otherwise - SHE IS A HYPOCRITE.
A note to "Yes":
According to this definition, Blessed Teresa of Calcutta was not a "nun." She did not live behind a screen. And, she did not wear a habit. Mother Theresa (and, today, those of her order) wore a simple sari, the dress of a woman in India.
But, I never had any problem with Mother Teresa being called a nun. And, to my knowledge, she never objected to the (technically incorrect) use of the word to describe the Missionaries of Charity.
I will be praying that Sr. Catherine will be filled with the Holy Spirit as she delivers the prayer at the Dem convention -- and that she prays for the Pro-Life cause as well as for peace in our world and justice for all peoples.
he reiterated his statement that a Catholic can vote for a pro-abortion candidate if there are "proportionate" reasons to do so.
Did he also mention, as he has previously, that being in favor of a higher minimum wage, supporting the idea of universal healthcare, immigration reform etc are not proportionate reasons?
He also added that the Church leaves it up to the individual to determine what those reasons are.
Based on a properly formed conscience not simply because one "feels" it to be the right reason.
It is important to read between the lines when looking at what the politicians say. Saying that people lack health insurance does not mean they aren't receiving health care. Saying that we will work more on preventing pregnancy in the first place to reduce the number of abortions at least for the Democrats simply means providing more artificial birth control. It does not mean teaching abstinence or that pre-marital sex is wrong as the Catholic Church teaches, it just means more money for Planned Parenthood. Do you think a President Obama will allow an opt out clause for Catholic doctors, hospitals, and pharmacists as President Bush has proposed. Not gonna happen. Do you think I will get a tax break to send my kids to Catholic school instead of the public school?
Democrats complain about the Iraq War as being unjust. Maybe it was initially but we are no longer at war with Iraq and really haven't been for a while. What have is terrorists, some loyal to the previous dicator and many from outside the country supported by enemies of the U.S., who are trying to destablize a legitemately elected government from succeeding as a democracy. What is hypocritical is for people to say they oppose the President and a presidential candidate because they supported the war. They will then use the argument that they will support an incredibly pro-abortion candidate and the rest of the Democratic party because they oppose the war. But just because they oppose this war does not mean they will oppose all war. Case in point the Balkans. The Balkans posed no security threat for the U.S yet we had no problem going there or continuing to keep troops there.
Europe and Canada have all the things Obama and the Democrats are pushing for and really, as a Catholic, that is not the model we should want.
Point of order: As yet no one has shown me any examples of a "Pro-life" Republican who has accomplished anything to make abortion illegal; or even less accessible on a National level. Once again, I point out, the Pro-Life Candidates who've been elected because of their stance have been awfully quiet.
I would suggest reading the NARAL Pro-Choice America website. They will point out all the pro-life legislators who stand in their way. Further it is difficult when you don't control the necessary majority to pass certain legislation. Consider the proposed regulations made by the White House that would give a conscience clause exemption to doctors and hospitals to not be forced into giving out contraceptives. Already this is under attack by the pro-abortion forces. In South Dakota where they passed laws restricting abortion they are sending in considerable pro-abortion troops to get that overturned. Every time a significant piece of legislation is proposed it is immediately challenged by Democrats in the court system. That is why you don't see much "accomplished."
Go to the Congressional websites to look up proposed legislation on abortion and/or pro-life. There is effort being made that is held up in commmittees that the Republicans do not control. So like many of the feared conservative and "pro-life" judges nominated by President Bush the Democrats will never give them the up or down vote sought in some cases for several years by obstructing abortion rights Democrats.
Castellanus, thank you! The good Deacon's obfuscations were disheartening.
Mhari Dubh said: ”Wishing that a religious order fades away soon? Nice.”
Praying for the Heterodox enemies of the Church to fade either by attrition or through change through embracing Orthodoxy – coming into full communion with the Church is our duty as Catholics.
We must pray for her order – short of the preferred outcome, I would settle to the fall back position: the hope that the order indeed fades from history very soon.
Pope John Paul II was correct in pointing out the new spring-time in the Church is coming. Once the remnant of liberal hippies in positions of power die out or retire, his vision will come to fruition.
It gains the Republican party nothing to do away with Roe v. Wade... Because once dealt with, they have almost no issues of any moral ground. The Democrats believe they stand on some altruistic platform preaching the ideas of socialist reform when in fact they are merely working to maintain a dependent voter base beholden to their "social" programs.
I'm sorry, but in good conscience, I can support neither party. I have decided it is best to opt out of this year's election. I have never supported the idea of voting of the lesser of evils, because it is still a vote for evil. We are all enraged by the atrocities of abortion, but electing a Republican will make no difference. Electing a Democrat will be the same. As Catholics OR Conservatives we have the Supreme Court stacked with a 5 to 4 majority. Yet Roe v. Wade stands...
All I can say my friends is may God have mercy on us and may our prayers be heard that we may receive a candidate in 2012.
As Catholics OR Conservatives we have the Supreme Court stacked with a 5 to 4 majority. Yet Roe v. Wade stands.
Justice Kennedy is not exactly a sure vote to overturn Roe v. Wade. Second it was only in the past year or so that we gained that majority. I don't know how it exactly works but I don't think the Supreme Court can suddenly decide they want to overturn Roe v. Wade without some other case being brought before it.
And yet no case has been brought. Hmmm.
And yet no case has been brought. Hmmm
And your point? Congress doesn't bring cases and any smart pro-life attorneys are going to wait until they have a good chance of winning. That is not going to happen with the current lineup including Justice Kennedy. If Obama wins the election it isn't going to happen for probably another 20 years.
Trust me... If they can push through gun a gun case for D.C., then you've got the deciding justices you need. Even without Kennedy there are enough conservatives.
Isn't there something in one of Paul's letters about how smart, pithy, educated and powerful words sound if they don't have love? Something about a clanging cymbal?
I'm sure that many, many Catholics have many, many political opinions.
Maybe this Blog is the right place for them. Maybe not.
But being a non-degree-holding, non-male, non-diaconate candidate, non-priest, non-powerful person it sounds awfully clanging and banging in here to me.
Discussion and debate is a good thing. It's wonderful for all to have opinions that aren't given to them at the end of a gun or point of a sword.
This blog often has those who disagree on certain points, but I think it unfair to say that there is no love among them. Whether or not I agree or disagree with other posts, I do not doubt the posting individuals love for his or her fellow Catholics. Nor should any doubt my love for them! The words I read, including my own at times, come from frustration. We are tired of injustice and we are tired of our voices remaining mute to the ruling parties in matters that concern us very much. Where we differ is in how we respond.
Peace be with you!
stone of bethel -
I may be very wrong, and if so please forgive me, but I doubt very seriously if Sr. Pinkerton has inflicted injustice upon you, or muted your voice.
The fact of her presence seems to annoy people and spark mean-spirited criticism of her - as a religious, as a woman and as a Catholic.
Frustration with the world, the system, secular politics or whatever is no real cause (and again I may be wrong here) to simply lash out anonymously on a blog at a woman who has clearly spent a great deal of her life in service to others.
I am not commenting on whether people have love in their hearts or in their lives. Just on the commentary in the blog.
I have no problem with the sister... In fact, scroll to the top and you'll see I was the first post hoping that she would use the forum well. I applaud hers or anyone's service to others. I was speaking about the political system of our country specifically about candidates which we have to choose from that mutes our true wish for a candidate we can all believe in. It is hard for some who have at their core a sincere zeal to stop abortion in its tracks and unfortunately Mr. Obama's record shows that he goes above and beyond a pro-choice agenda. And as you can see it has bothered many that one of our own is speaking at the DNC convention. I personally see an opportunity, but I understand why some take it badly.
Again their words are just that, words! Commenting on a blog is a good way to blow off steam. I doubt there is any hatred directed at the sister... If I'm wrong, please someone correct me, but as Catholics, as Christians it is the first and foremost mission put forth by Christ himself to love one another.
Stone of Bethel -
I can see your point about blowing off steam, but I also see Catholic Blogs and the Catholic presence on the Internet as an opportunity to show the world what Christianity can mean from inside a faith community.
To that end it is part of my spiritual path to use my voice to some purpose other than venting. That's just me.
So, here is what the good sister had to share at the DNC. Boy! Aren't we glad she spoke when she did:
- COLORADO CONVENTION CENTER — Following the hot topic of abortion, Sister Helen Prejean tackled another: calling for abolition of the death penalty to raucous applause at the DNC’s interfaith gathering.
She received nothing but a stony silence, however, when she questioned the basis of the biblical crucifixion story as a “projection of our violent society.”
“Is this a God?” Prejeans asked about the belief that God allowed his son, Jesus, to be sacrificed for the sins of humanity. “Or is this an ogre?”
Quoted from First Things Magazine
Phil ...
That's a different sister. Sister Helen Prejean is the one played by Susan Sarandon in "Dead Man Walking."
Dcn. G.
Post a Comment