Catholic Faithful Boo Cupich at Prolife Rally

 

For just how long will the Catholic faithful accept a bishop who is consistently problematic before they start to speak out?

This weekend, Cardinal Blaise Cupich spoke at the March for Life rally in Chicago. He was heckled and booed and eventually led away by security. Catholics clearly have had enough.

Cardinal Cupich started the day off with a VERY pro-abort tweet (corrected after outrage but awful nonetheless):

CNA wrote a decent report on this which presents the reasons for Cupich's poor reception from marchers: 

Cupich was criticized by some in the pro-life movement last year for leading an effort to head off a direct confrontation between the United States Conference of Bishops and President Joe Biden, who as the country's second Catholic president has pursued policies at odds with official Church teaching against abortion and same-sex marriage.

A year ago Cupich took to Twitter to issue a scathing criticism of what he called an "ill-considered" statement the USCCB released on the day of Biden's inauguration that called abortion "a direct attack on life that also wounds the woman and undermines the family."

Cupich flew to Rome to meet with Pope Francis 10 days later, in a move some observers saw as an attempt to enlist the Vatican's help in steering the USCCB away from adopting a policy of denying communion to Biden and other politicians who actively promote legalized abortion. The U.S. bishops in November voted 222 to 8, with three abstentions, in favor of releasing a new teaching document that calls for Eucharistic renewal in the Church. The document does not mention Biden or any other politicians by name.

I posted a history of Cupich's problematic comments here last month.

At the USCCB meeting in 2019. Cupich wanted the insertion of a long paragraph into the text which he suggested would "contextualize" the Church’s position on life issues, and especially the teaching of Pope Francis. The committee considering the amendments, led by the USCCB president-elect Archbishop Jose Gomez of Los Angeles, agreed to include an abbreviated version of Cupich’s paragraph, including language insisting that the “firm and passionate” defence of the unborn should be matched with support for the “equally sacred” lives of the poor, inform, elderly, and marginalized.

Cupich argued that his proposed wording was necessary, even if it was longer, in order properly to represent the full concerns of the Pope. Interesting that Cupich saw himself as some kind of voice piece of Pope Francis there.

Cupich isn't against condemning some sins though. In 2008, shortly before the Presidential Elections, he wrote an essay on the evil of racism published in America Magazine.

In 2011, Cupich discouraged priests and seminarians in his diocese from participating in demonstrations in front of Planned Parenthood clinics or supporting 40 Days for Life, a pro-life movement that conducts vigils at facilities that offered abortion services.

In April 2012, Cupich supported the decision of Gonzaga University to invite Anglican Archbishop Desmond Tutu to speak at its graduation ceremonies and receive an honorary degree, against which the Cardinal Newman Society and others active in the pro-life movement were protesting.

So you can see, his open opposition to pro-life Catholics is a consistent theme in his ministry.

I have no doubt some will argue FOR Cupich's approach here which is basically the "Seamless Garment" advocated by Cardinal Bernadine. Read more about him here. He seems to be the USA's equivalent to Worlock - founder of the infamous "Magic Circle" here in the UK.

On this issue Cupich seems to have the backing of Pope Francis, as demonstrated by his meeting with the Pope further to the USCCB vote.

The Holy Father does use much stronger terms than Cupich to condemn abortion, but in typical Bergoglian fashion, he then entertains pro-abortion politicians even presenting them with awards on occasion and praises abortion activists. Typically confusing behaviour which allows everyone to basically draw whatever conclusion they want.

Maybe the problem is with the way Cupich comes across, but there's no doubt he has a record of consistently opposing prolifers. His reception at this rally would appear to put in clear relief the fact that this message has not been lost on the faithful, who increasingly see Cupich as in opposition to Catholic teaching.

I think this is a good sign. It is a sign that faithful Catholics will not simply allow unfaithful leaders to hold positions of power while speaking against the faith (implicitly or explicitly). Enough is enough!