Joe, you're definitely typical of what Fr. Andrew Greeley describes as 'The American Catholic.' Also known as the 'cafeteria catholic.'

However, I submit that in politics (which was the start of this thread) the US Catholic Bishops have a great deal more influence than they do even over the day-to-day behavior of the average contraceptive-popping American Catholic.

For example, in the last couple of elections they've done things like threaten to, and actually deny, Communion to legislators who have taken the position that decisions regarding abortion are the woman's and not the government's. That has, first, put the (usually liberal on social-justice issues) politician in an awkward position personally, and harmed his chances at election.

I believe it is disingenuous of you to claim that neither Rome nor the American Catholic Church at large interfere with women's rights to abortion and contraception. They absolutely do so, from wielding political influence in a fashion which puts their tax-exempt status in serious jeopardy to 'education' programs which are, at best, intellectually dishonest scare tactics and at worst absolutely hurtful and uncharitable. Or supporting things like parental notification rules in their state, and making it illegal for a minor to be assisted to cross state lines to obtain an abortion. If these aren't 'aggressive' tactics, then I don't know what is.

And I disagree that the California bishops have been in any sense of the word 'good' on the abuse issue. They have been amongst the worst. Even bastions of progressivism on other social justice issues (and this IS a social justice issue) such as Cardinal Mahoney of LA have been real bastards when it comes to dealing with abuse victims. To that 'hall of shame' add former bishop (now in Ratzinger's old job) Levada of San Francisco, emeritus John Cummins of Oakland, 'Bankruptcy' Brom of San Diego, Walsh of Santa Rosa. That's just off the top of my head; I'm sure I could add to the rogue's gallery of those who've taken every legal maneuver to protect their documents and cover their assets. I believe without exception, these are regarded as 'progressive' Vatican II bishops.

Until the pew-sitters who 'distance' themselves from the issues in the magisterium actually join VOTF or CTA en masse and start making some serious demands, then it's not going to get fixed.

And lets not forget that that these are the same single men who marginalize women as a whole and who describe homosexuals as 'disordered' while protecting the none-too-scarce practicing homosexuals in their own midst!

For Fr. Peter Pham, the suspension of his license (which hasn't happened yet, insofar as I can tell) isn't fatal; he's still a diocesean priest in a world with a heck of a shortage of same. On the other hand, for some lay theologians, it has been nearly career-ending; the lucky ones have found a home in Protestant or secular institutions. But don't minimize it. It's rather like a physician being told that he can't practice in most of the hospitals who would be interested in his services. In addition the suspension of the license often goes more to the place they get their bread-and-butter living; for example teaching general theology survey courses which have nothing to do with the cutting- edge research presented in books such as Pham's.

The Catholics whom I'm proud of are the ones who've said 'no' to this whole mess and who've left behind the big real estate holdings to align themselves with alternative Catholic movements, such as the Ecumenical Catholic Communion. They are the ones who're breaking the pattern. They've stopped telling themselves that the people are great, it's the institution that is flawed. They've realized that the people are the institution.