The Last Word: Cuomo

It all began quietly enough. Bishop Joseph O’Keefe, vicar general of the New York Archdiocese, advised all parishes to avoid inviting guest speakers who might “attack the Church” or who reject the “clear, unambiguous teaching of the Church.” That sounded straightforward enough, and (just in case anyone had any doubts) Bishop O’Keefe had the full public support of his boss, Cardinal O’Connor. But the bishop hadn’t reckoned with New York’s most famous amateur theologian, Governor Mario Cuomo.

As Governor Cuomo saw it — and helpfully told the mass media — the new policy was unwieldy. If they followed Bishop O’Keefe’s advice consistently, Cuomo reasoned, Catholic parishes would exclude not only people who favor abortion, but also those who favor birth control, or even the death penalty. (The U.S. bishops have consistently lobbied against capital punishment.) And while the Church teaching on capital punishment might not carry the same weight as the prohibition on abortion, Cuomo added, nevertheless “all three [that is, the condemnations of artificial contraception, abortion, and capital punishment] are Church teachings.” And if anyone doubted that he knew his stuff, the Governor pointed out that Rev. Richard McBrien, the chairman of Notre Dame’s theology department, had agreed with his interpretation of Church teachings.

There are two very interesting footnotes in this case. First, Governor Cuomo placed great emphasis on the “Catholic teaching” about capital punishment. By the sheerest of coincidences, his Republican opponent in the upcoming election, Andrew O’Rourke, supports the death penalty. And since he himself has clashed with the Church over abortion, the Governor has obvious ulterior motives in this case: if he can’t speak in parish halls, by golly O’Rourke shouldn’t, either. Second, when he needed a theologian to help him determine exactly what the Church teaches, Cuomo sought out Father McBrien. An interesting choice. Just months ago, the U.S. bishops warned that Father McBrien’s own catechism failed to present Catholic teachings accurately. Still, while revealing, these are merely side issues.

The main issue is the political manipulation of the bishops’ teaching authority. Mario Cuomo is not an ignorant man; he should certainly realize the distinction between the U.S. bishops’ public-policy suggestions and the immutable truths of the faith. (So should Father McBrien.) But less educated Catholics — to say nothing of observers from outside the Church — might not grasp that distinction.


The Catholic Church holds to many fixed doctrines: the Real Presence, the Immaculate Conception, the Trinity. But our bishops rarely issue joint statements on these matters — and when they do, those statements pass unnoticed. When the bishops’ conference speaks out on capital punishment, however, the headlines are assured. Is it any wonder that many Catholics, noticing the headlines about political issues and the silence about others, become confused about the bishops’ theological priorities? Is it any wonder that politicians like Mario Cuomo play upon that confusion?

Every Catholic can find some issue on which he disagrees with his bishop — whether it is the Arian controversy, the minimum wage, or the need to repave the cathedral’s parking lot. In an age of do-it-yourself theology, there is a strong tendency to assume that all such disagreements carry equal weight. So the outright heretic, who denies the Resurrection, can claim that his dissent is not different from that of someone who rejects the bishops’ arguments on the merits of the MX missile.

For several years, the American bishops have issued public statements on a grab-bag of political issues, thereby expanding the range of questions on which, inevitably, some Catholics will disagree with them. At the same time they have countenanced an enormous volume of scholarly speculation, even outright dissent, on core Christian doctrines. (Recall that it was the Vatican, not the U.S. bishops’ conference, that finally drew the line on Father Curran.) In the resulting confusion, many puzzled Catholics have begun to decide for themselves which doctrines are most important to the faith.

One important aspect of a bishop’s mission is to help the faithful distinguish between fallible judgments and fundamental dogmas, between the passing issues of the day and the eternal truths of the faith. On many — most — questions, believing Catholics will always disagree. But some issues are beyond dispute. Being a Catholic means adhering to the fundamental truths of the faith, or else being a Catholic means nothing at all.

Sooner or later, for the welfare of ordinary faithful Catholics, our bishops must restore some clarity to the discussion. Bishop O’Keefe’s policy — refusing Church sponsorship for speakers who disdain Church teaching — is a step in the right direction. But only a step. Governor Cuomo’s disingenuous reaction shows how far our bishops still must travel.

Philip Lawler


Born and raised in the Boston area, Phil Lawler attended Harvard College, graduating with honors in Government in 1972. He did graduate work in political philosophy at the University of Chicago before entering a career in journalism. He has been Director of Studies for the Heritage Foundation, a member of two presidential inaugural committees; and a candidate for the US Senate. As a journalist, Phil has acted as editor of Crisis magazine. In 1986 he became the first layman to edit The Pilot, the Boston archdiocesan newspaper. From 1993 through 2005, Phil Lawler was the editor of Catholic World Report, an international monthly news magazine. And in 1996, recognizing the power of the internet, he founded Catholic World News: the first online Catholic news service. Phil Lawler is the author of five books on political and religious topics. He has recently completed a new book titled "The Faithful Departed: The Collapse of Boston's Catholic Culture". His essays, book reviews, and editorial columns have appeared in over 100 newspapers around the United States and abroad, including the Wall Street Journal, Los Angeles Times, Washington Post, and Boston Globe. Phil lives in central Massachusetts with his wife Leila and their seven children.

Crisis Magazine Comments Policy

This is a Catholic forum. As such:

  1. All comments must directly address the article. “I tell you, on the day of judgment men will render account for every careless word they utter.” (Matthew 12:36)
  2. No profanity, ad hominems, hot tempers, or racial or religious invectives. “And be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you.” (Ephesians 4:32)
  3. We will not tolerate heresy, calumny, or attacks upon our Holy Mother Church or Holy Father. “And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it.” (Matthew 16:18)
  4. Keep it brief. No lengthy rants or block quotes. “For you are a mist that appears for a little time and then vanishes.” (James 4:14)
  5. If you see a comment that doesn’t meet our standards, please flag it so a moderator may remove it. “Brethren, if a man is overtaken in any trespass, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness.” (Galatians 6:1)
  6. All comments may be removed at the moderators’ discretion. “But of that day and hour no one knows…” (Matthew 24:36)
  7. Crisis isn’t responsible for the content of the comments box. Comments do not represent the views of Crisis magazine, its editors, authors, or publishers. “Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of God… So each of us shall give account of himself to God.” (Romans 14:10, 12)