CNS interviews Miguel Diaz, new U.S. ambassador to the Vatican

This CNS article, from an interview with Miguel Diaz, U.S. ambassador to the Vatican, deserves a fisk, Fr. Z-style:

"As ambassador, I know there are areas where the Holy See and the United States are not in complete agreement. [Like, oh, say, the sanctity of life? Areas like that?] But I seek to be a bridge-builder [as opposed to a boat-rocker?], and to underscore that we can work together in multiple areas," Diaz said in an interview with Catholic News Service Oct. 7. [I have never understood this: who is arguing that we can't work together? No one. It's a red herring, repeated over and over again to make it look like we're finding some ground-breaking common ground, when in fact, nothing's changed.]

Continuing on:

The Oct. 14-16 conference on pediatric HIV/AIDS will feature key Vatican participants as well as medical experts and church workers in the field.

"I think this is precisely an example that shows that, while there may not be total agreement on all points regarding a specific issue [i.e. combating AIDS through moral vs. immoral means], there are possibilities for people of good will to come together for the sake of, in this case, children," Diaz said.[What about unborn children? How about coming together for their sake?...and the crickets chirp..]

And this part is especially crucial:

In his speech to the new ambassador, Pope Benedict underlined the church's teaching on respect for life, from the moment of conception to natural [Reason 1,782 why Pope Benedict rocks]-- a teaching that has relevance in the current debate over health care reform in the United States.[Get it right, once and for all, folks.]

Diaz, a Catholic theologian [!], said the health care debate touched on very important issues. [Perhaps so important that they're above his paygrade? Wait for it...] But he cautioned against assuming that he would be entering into that debate on a diplomatic level, or acting as a spokesperson for the church's positions. [And so JFK syndrome - my faith won't affect my political life - rears its ugly head.]

"There are a number of domestic issues that are very important, but I think my role as U.S. ambassador is to represent the United States on the level of policy," Diaz said. [Kind of like good old Gov. Kathleen Sebelius on her pro-choice record: "I feel that my actions as a parishioner are different than my actions as a public official and that the people who elected me in Kansas had a right to expect me to uphold their rights and their beliefs even if they did not have the same religious beliefs that I had." JFK syndrome, once again. Amazing how contagious that is among Catholic politicians...] "When differences emerge relative to those policies, then it is my role to engage in the kind of bridge-building that is necessary in diplomacy." [There is no bridge between "abortion rights" and "abortion is intrinsically evil."]

He added that while theology remains extremely important to him, "I am fully conscious that I am not here ... in the capacity of a theologian to do theology, but to do diplomatic activity." [Again, the concept that he can simply turn on and off his Catholic faith as it suits him. 'Ok, now I'm a theologian - I believe abortion is evil. Ok, now I'm a diplomat. I believe abortion is a very important issue and I can act as a bridgebuilder.' Didn't Jesus say something about being lukewarm?]

For the record, JFK Syndrome is not limited to politicians. Most people fall victim to the temptation to compartmentalize their faith. It's especially tempting when society isn't exactly supportive of being a devout Christian. So I don't mean to pick on politicians, as if they are the only hypocrites.

But a Catholic theologian, of all people, should know better than to tap dance around the severity and enormity of the abortion issue.

End of story.