 |
| Fr. Daniel Coughlin Chaplain, US House of Representatives 2001-2011 |
Let’s all take a walk down
Memory Lane to late 1999 when then newly-elected Speaker of the United States
House of Representatives, Dennis Hastert, (an “Evangelical Christian”)
appointed a bi-partisan committee of Members of the House to nominate a new
chaplain. Technically, the appointment
of a Chaplain to the House is a prerogative of the Speaker, but as the Chaplain
is available to all members of the Chamber for Spiritual Guidance, Hastert
believed that a search committee would be a good idea. There were over 50 applicants for the job; heading
the list of three finalists submitted to Speaker Hastert was Father Timothy
O’Brien, a priest of the Archdiocese of Milwaukee, nominated for the post by
Representative Gerald Kleczka (Wisconsin, Democrat). Never before in its 210
year history had the House had a Catholic Chaplain. It almost didn’t then.
O’Brien holds a doctorate and
is a professor of Political Science at Marquette University. His undergraduate degree is in
Pastoral Ministry; his specialized studies include Counseling and Addictive
Personality; he has been Consultant to the Archdiocese of Milwaukee, Department
of Social Ministry since 1984; he served as Chaplain at Walter Reed Medical
Center; he has worked in youth ministries most of his life; and for three
decades he has counseled soldiers—male and female, single and married—as a
Colonel in the Army Reserve. In other words, O’Brien was a man of remarkable
qualification for the job. Speaker Hastert, supported by Texas Representative and
House Majority Leader, Dick Armey, (Presbyterian) passed over Father O’Brien
and Episcopalian Reverend Robert Dvorak to choose Presbyterian Charles Nathan
Wright. Immediately there were cries of
“foul” and “anti-Catholicism” as it was revealed that while the committee had overwhelming
recommended O’Brien as first choice, there were House members who had pass
questionable remarks. Representative
Steve Largent (Republican Okla.; “Born Again Christian”) passed the derogatory
remark about O’Brien’s clerical collar: “Tell me about that thing you’re
wearing.” Others publically wondered how
a man who was himself unmarried could be resourceful to married
counselees. One went so far as to
question whether an unmarried clergyman could be of sound moral character. There were unfounded rumors of financial
improprieties. The whole thing became
quite unsavory. Hastert and his Evangelical
supporters, being very blunt that they wanted a Protestant chaplain, dug in
their heels and insisted on Wright.
House Whip, Tom DeLay (Republican, TX, and a Baptist) asserted that
O’Brien would never serve as Chaplain. But
mainline Republicans, especially from beyond he Bible Belt, began to feel
pressure from their constituents. When
even conservative Catholics began to complain about Republican Presidential
candidate George W. Bush opening his campaign at notoriously anti-Catholic Bob
Jones University, the credibility of the Republican Party in regard to respect
for its Catholic members made Hastert find the quickest way to undo to the
damage.
In the end Reverend Wright
withdrew his acceptance of the post. This
time Hastert skipped all the niceties of a search committee and contacted
Chicago Archbishop Francis George for a suggestion of a priest that could fit
the bill. The Archbishop suggested
Father Daniel Coughlin of Chicago. Congress
was out of session when Hastert made the appointment but elected Coughlin as
House Chaplain on January 2, 2001 when the 107th congress
convened. Father Coughlin did remarkable
work as a chaplain until his retirement in 2001. As a testimony to the success of his ministry, his successor is another Catholic priest, the Jesuit Father Patrick
Conroy.
Now of course Mr. Hastert
finds himself in troubles of his own.
Surprisingly many of his “Evangelical” colleagues, including Mr. DeLay
and other former members of the House have written letters praising his
contribution to American Political Life and recommending leniency in his
sentencing. This is an American cultural
problem: the sin is not in the act it is in the getting caught. While the
issues are essentially different, the same flaw of public righteousness
concealing private sin underlies the Michael Voris situation. Again, many of the neo-trads are rallying to
him, calling him “brave,” and “an example for us all.” Can you imagine how the
American public would have reacted to Hastert's abuse of young men in the days when he wielded such
power from the Speaker’s Chair? This was
the time of Karl Rove and his cynical exploitation of religious
conservatives. They hypocrisy of so many
of those same voices has gradually come to light and done tremendous damage to
any and all religious credibility. The
same is true of Michael Voris. I will
give him credit for having “abandoned his sinful ways” but in his embracing a
gospel of contempt and disdain for those in whose company he once found
himself, he has only reinforced a negative view of Catholicism.
I am sorry that Mr. Hastert
and Mr. Voris had ever been trapped in their particular questionable lifestyles
but I wish that they had learned understanding rather than judgment from their
experiences. A healthy recovery from sin
reminds us to stand with the publican and pray “Have mercy on me for I am a
sinner,” rather than with the Pharisee reminding God of our alleged
righteousness. Maybe the rest of us,
whether or not we have mud caked on our hands, can learn not to throw stones
but to ask God for the gift of a listening heart. (cf 1 Kings 3:9)
