By Luke Nolan
Earlier this month, Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California was questioning Amy Coney Barrett during her confirmation hearing for the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals. During the hearing, Feinstein made a rather inappropriate comment regarding Barrett’s Catholic faith.
“When you read your speeches, the conclusion one draws is that the dogma lives loudly within you, and that’s of concern when you come to big issues that large numbers of people have fought for for years in this country,” Feinstein said.
Feinstein draws this conclusion from a collection of writings and speeches made by Barrett that suggested that Catholics serving as judges or jurors in capital cases should recuse themselves instead of violate their own conscience.
Given that Barrett’s suggestion in regards to capital punishment and the ideological beliefs of Feinstein are in union with each other in this regard, it makes one wonder why Feinstein would even bring it up.
The unnecessary comments continued when Sen. Dick Durbin asked, “Do you consider yourself an orthodox Catholic?” Durbin, a Catholic, has long since put ideology above faith, given his pro-choice leanings.
The comments made by the two senators are indicative perhaps of ignorance but also of blind ideology. It is likely that these two senators worry about inquisitorial, superstitious and bigoted Catholics who seek to impose their morality on the rest of the country. A blatant stereotype is what worries them; one that has a long and sometimes bloody history in the United States.
The reason for the comments is probably due to a misunderstanding of the Catholic faith and how it is lived in the context of a public office, such as the one sought by Barrett. The Catholic faith has no qualm with anyone serving in public office; it actually encourages it.
The worries of Feinstein and Durbin are based purely on ideology and the assumption that Barrett will crusade tirelessly for the pro-life movement as a judge. They seem to be hostile to any influence on one’s public life other than secular ideology, which they happily embrace as their own religion. This would seem to implicitly suggest that people of faith, particularly those who are “orthodox,” should be restricted from serving in public office, unless one’s “orthodoxy” is in line with whichever ideology is in power.
People such as Durbin and Feinstein would simultaneously use religion as a political club against their enemies while they interrogate a judicial nominee because of her faith. Their comments demonstrate a total lack of respect for Barrett’s beliefs as well as her abilities as a judge and public servant.
nolanl17@bonaventure.edu
