Archbp. Burke: USCCB document partly to blame for Catholic support of pro-abortion pols

From LifeSite:

Exclusive Interview: Leading Vatican Prelate Says Document of US Bishops Partly to Blame for Election of “Most Pro-Abortion President”

Also says Bishops’ Catholic News Service needs to be given "some new direction"
By Hilary White, Rome Correspondent

ROME, January 28, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A document of the US Catholic Bishops is partly to blame for the abandonment of pro-life teachings by voting Catholics and the election of the “most pro-abortion president” in US history, one of the Vatican’s highest officials said in an interview with LifeSiteNews.com.  [God bless Archbp. Burke.  I pray for him everyday after Mass.  I hope you will also.]

Archbishop Raymond Burke, the prefect of the Apostolic Signatura, named a document on the election produced by the US Conference of Catholic Bishops that he said “led to confusion” among the faithful and led ultimately to massive support among Catholics for Barack Obama.

The US bishops’ document, “Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship,” stated that, under certain circumstances, a Catholic could in good conscience vote for a candidate who supports abortion because of "other grave reasons," as long as they do not intend to support that pro-abortion position.

Archbishop Burke, the former Archbishop of St. Louis Mo. and recently appointed head of the highest ecclesiastical court in the Catholic Church, told LifeSiteNews.com that although “there were a greater number of bishops who spoke up very clearly and firmly … there was also a number who did not.”

But most damaging, he said, was the document “Faithful Citizenship” that “led to confusion” among the voting Catholic population[For sure.]

“While it stated that the issue of life was the first and most important issue, it went on in some specific areas to say ‘but there are other issues’ that are of comparable importance without making necessary distinctions.”

Archbishop Burke, citing an article by a priest and ethics expert of St. Louis archdiocese, Msgr. Kevin McMahon, who analysed how the bishops’ document actually contributed to the election of Obama, called its proposal “a kind of false thinking, that says, ‘there’s the evil of taking an innocent and defenceless human life but there are other evils and they’re worthy of equal consideration.

“But they’re not. The economic situation, or opposition to the war in Iraq, or whatever it may be, those things don’t rise to the same level as something that is always and everywhere evil, namely the killing of innocent and defenseless human life.”

Archbishop Burke also cited the work of the official news service of the US Catholic Bishops’ Conference, that many pro-life observers complained soft-pedalled the newly elected president’s opposition to traditional morality.   [YES!]

The bishops need to look also at our Catholic News Service, CNS, they need to review their coverage of the whole thing and give some new direction, in my judgement,” he said.

How many times can Archbishop Burke get kudos until he starts to glow in the dark?

Thanks to LifeSite for this great article.

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in SESSIUNCULA. Bookmark the permalink.

42 Responses to Archbp. Burke: USCCB document partly to blame for Catholic support of pro-abortion pols

  1. Central Valley Catholic says:

    AMEN, how we need more bishops like Archbishop Burke. Sadly in the diocese of Fresno, Ca, our bishop constantly referes to this worthless document.

  2. irishgirl says:

    On target Archbishop Burke!

    When will he get his red hat?

    I wish cloning was OK-then we can get more Bishops like him!

  3. Yeah, Archbishop Burke, definitely taking a few to the woodshed, I’m sure the wailing and gnashing of teeth will start soon, we need dozens more like him

  4. Frank H says:

    But how many US Catholics are/were even aware of this document?

  5. IvoDeNorthfield says:

    There was a theory circulating, at the time of Abp Burke’s move, that it was a ploy to get him out of the well-coiffed hair of the USCCB. If that was indeed the strategy, it might have backfired.

  6. ““there were a greater number of bishops who spoke up very clearly and firmly … there was also a number who did not.” ”

    So how the ones who did not been called to account?

  7. “But how many US Catholics are/were even aware of this document?”

    Many of the ones I have spoken to who voted for Obama have cited that very document, it was made well known by groups like Catholics for Obama with the obvious slant you would expect, by the way is any disciplinary action going to be taken against them for perverting Church teaching? How about Pelosi? How about anyone been held to account for what is frankly a shameful failure?

  8. tertullian says:

    Bravo Card. Burke! (yes, I know…I’m an optimist)Perhaps his standing in Rome will enhance our chances for the appointment of like-minded Bishops in the near future, starting in the LA diocese where the latest news isn’t looking good for Card. Mahony.

  9. I wonder how my own bishop (His Eminence Justin Cardinal Rigali of Philadelphia) feels about this sort of a direct insult to the whole U.S. episcopate, considering that he probably would have had more than a little say about the language used in the document concerning life issues, given his Chairmanship of the relevant committee. Nevertheless, I could not agree more with Archbishop Burke and deeply appreciate his much needed bluntness and discerning pastoral concern amidst a U.S. episcopate that, collectively, has been nothing less than an embarassment to the universal Church in its lack of united opposition to President Obama’s candidacy or clarity on the issue of abortion.

    ~cmpt

  10. Anne Gomes says:

    I agree with Archbishop Burke whole-heartedly on the issue, but I know many Catholics who voted for Obama based strictly on their pocketbook and perception that he will solve the financial “crisis”. Any moral issue took far second place for these people. Again, I think we are reaping the effects of bad formation of conscience for a generation. These folks seem to think with the money in their pockets and the way they feel about something, not on the basis of objective good and evil. AnneG in NC
    PS Our new bishop +Burbidge did a good job in an uphill battle.

  11. Jordanes says:

    “The bishops need to look also at our Catholic News Service, CNS, they need to review their coverage of the whole thing and give some new direction, in my judgement,” he said.

    Ain’t that the truth. CNS coverage has long been downplaying the problems that faithful Catholics have with Obama’s evil agenda. This week they even came out with a story that reassures everyone that, don’t worry folks, there is no danger at all to Catholic health care from FOCA or any other legislative measure:

    http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0900402.htm

    Nice way to lull the Church into a false sense of security . . . .

  12. Ken says:

    Jordanes, I was just about to make that exact same point.

    While CNS is partly to blame, “Sister Carol” needs a serious lecture.

    Contrast her comments to that of a good priest in this article:

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jan/29/catholics-hit-obama-on-pro-choice-agenda/

  13. paul says:

    My 2 cents:
    I agree with Abp. Burke that Faithful Citizenship could have been clearer and stronger.
    On the other hand, I cannot say that simply having a clear document from the USCCB would make that much difference in how Catholics voted. Remember, most 75% of U.S. “Catholics” don’t even attend Sunday Mass, so do you really think they are going to change their vote based on what the bishops say?
    The one thing I do think would make a difference, however, is for clear preaching from the pulpit at the parish level.

  14. David says:

    This is more of the same…group guilt.

    While I agree that Catholics should not vote for Obama, Biden, Giuliani, et al; still, the bishops should be holding the INDIVIDUALS responsible who have the INDIVIDUAL responsibility for making the laws. The American people are not primarily responsible.

    In fact, 5 of the 9 members of the Supreme Court are Roman Catholic. 2 of them have consistently voted to overturn Roe. 2 others (Alito and Roberts) would presumably also do so. The 5th, Anthony Kennedy, has consistently voted to uphold Roe. He is the one man in the country who could change the abortion laws for the better. The pressure exerted by the Church should be directed against HIM, rather than generally against Catholics.

    Where is that pressure?

  15. Paul Haley says:

    It is my personal opinion that Archbishop Burke and Cardinal Stafford are working for the cause of healing the wounds in the Mystical Body and may be instigating in some discreet ways the reconciliation process with the FSSPX. They are both in positions of great power within the Curia. Ad multos annos.

  16. GOR says:

    Yes Father, God bless him indeed! While I hated to lose him in the ‘local’ Church, I expected he would have greater influence in the Universal Church from his post in Rome. I expect that was also behind the Holy Father’s decision to appoint him. We await the Cardinal’s hat and, who knows, eventually even higher office…

  17. Dan says:

    “But most damaging, he said, was the document “Faithful Citizenship” that “led to confusion” among the voting Catholic population. ”

    I believe that I can state with confidence that not one Catholic attached to FSSP, SSPX, ICK or any so-called “Latin Mass” parishes or chapels (even “independent” Latin Mass groups) was confused regarding the abortion issue.

    Why is it that Catholics who belong to, if you will, “Novus Ordo parishes,” are always confused about their faith?

    Catholics attached to the Extraordinary Form Mass are never confused regarding Faith and Morals (whether they sin is another matter)…but they know the Faith.

    Conversely, many, if not the majority, of Catholics attached to the Ordinary Form Mass are in a state of utter confusion regarding the Faith.

    Is there any wonder why “irregular status” Catholics scoff at the notion that they must detach themselves from “schismatic Latin Mass groups” when so many Catholic parishes that are “in full communion with Rome” have been “desacralized” (Josef Cardinal Ratzinger’s term (His Holiness)) and wrecked spiritually?

    The reality is that “in full communion with Rome” bishops, priests and laity are, compared, for example, to the SSPX, in far greater need of being “regularized.”

    What a disaster we have within the Church. The time has arrived for the Church to engage in a frank discussion regarding the monumental disaster that is the Vatican II Era!

  18. The pamphlet was handed out at parishes

    And the fact it confused people shouldnt surprise anyone. Atleast our “parish” priests (I use parish in the territorial sense, I try to go to a TLM oratory when I can), never bothered to speak about it at all. It was mroe “Oh hey there are these pamphlets go read them.

    This is why catholics flocked to him. There was NO direction for the most part at the diocesan parish level. If priests have faculties from their Bishops, part of that is preaching is it not? You had Dioceses where the lone voice was the Bishop, and pastors stood there and didnt want to make “waves”. In Many cases this was exemplified in St. Louis. Bishop burke would do one thing or another out of true pastoral love, controversy would insue, the Laity would form their own opinions, following sunday you get a dopey homily with a beatle’s song in it. Silliness. People like his excellency , cant do it on their own, they are guides for the rest of us.

    God Bless Raymond Burke, and all Bishops (and priests) who defend life and are carrying their cross for it.

  19. Dan says:

    “Remember, most 75% of U.S. “Catholics” don’t even attend Sunday Mass, so do you really think they are going to change their vote based on what the bishops say?”

    That is correct. But the real and alarming problem is that about 45 percent of Catholics who assist at Mass (Ordinary Form) disregarded the Church’s teaching on abortion and cast their ballots for President Obama.

    The reality is that a great many Ordinary Form Mass-going Catholics are basically identitical to Catholics who don’t assist at Mass regularly.

    A great many Ordinary Form Mass-going Catholics believe in ordaining women to the priesthood, support artifical birth control, abortion, homosexual marriage.

    In other words, as the result of having been deprived of the TLM, the majority of Latin Rite Catholics have lost their spiritual identities.

  20. “The reality is that a great many Ordinary Form Mass-going Catholics are basically identitical to Catholics who don’t assist at Mass regularly.”

    Exactly, they see mass as something to get out of the way, their “Sunday Obligation”

    Maybe Part of the problem is wording. You see things like “Holy Day of Obligation” or “Your Sunday obligation” . Obligation to english speaking people means something they “have to do”. As such they are just showing up to get it out of the way, God Willing in time so they can watch football (no offense to followers of the game, but you watch during foot6ball season. the “vigil” is usually packed…. Sundays suffer).

    You are also correct, in that they have lost their spiritual identity.

    The Eucharist is the key, atleast from where I am sitting. Now I am not but a lay person, but I will leave with one more thing. MY wife struggled with her own conversion for 2 years in our marriage (she is a convert). At a funeral, she went up for a “blessing” during the distribution, out of a deep respect for the person, who was our dear friend (I was cantoring this, so I wasnt able to guide her properly). However, when she came back she was trembling. IT hit her! Here was God, before her, and she had been in His presence, even though she couldnt fully recieve, she knew what was infront of her. Her conversion promptly followed, because it finally made sense. By the will of God, she was baptized, recieved first communion, and confirmed the following Easter Vigil; the Eucharist was the key. Everything from that point made sense.

    Now this is a leap of faith by no doubt, but , if people greater understood what was truly there, it would all trickle up hill. You get respect for priests, priests have the courage to teach, you have respect for bishops, and you eliminate the Womyn priests, the CTA folks, or the more close to home “Save St Stan Crowd” (i use the three purely as personified examples)

  21. RANCHER says:

    The ABp is absolutely correct. That poorly worded document was used extensively by the various “catholics for Obama” organizations to justify the catholic vote for the merchant of death. The document itself combined with too little too late from the USCCB and often nothing at all from Pastors allowed the greatest percentage of catholic voters to rationalize their vote for the party of death. Well in advance of the 2010 elections (NOW is a good time) the document needs to be extensively revised, Bishops need to resume the admonitions that began a few months before the election but have largely stopped, and Pastors need to get off the feel good stuff and start talking, consistently, about moral responsibility. The failure to do these things will only make the problem worse than it is, difficult as that is to imagine.

  22. Kristen J says:

    As a wife and mother who respects and loves the Traditions of the Church, but who usually attends a OF Mass (reverently celebrated) with her family, I have long since grown tired of being told by regular attendees of the EF Mass that the OF Mass — where Christ is just as truly present in the Scriptures and in His Body as at the EF Mass and which the Church has declared to be valid and in fact ordinary! — is, without qualification, causing folks like us to be ignorant of the Faith, immoral, etc. Basically, we are clearly told that we OF folks are not “real Catholics” like you EF folks are. That’s nonsense! Many at both forms of the Mass know and love the Catholic Faith, and strive to live it. Some — at both forms — do not! If the OF is good enough for Christ’s Church and Vicar, why is it not good enough for you?!

    Perhaps people who make false and defamatory statements about their fellow OF Catholics might consider that it is often ARROGANT holier-than-thou statements and gestures by EF-attending people that keep others away from the beautiful EF Mass, not the bishops, or ignorance, or bad morals!

    Since I (horror of horrors) may wear nice slacks to Mass instead of a skirt, and since I do not yet veil, and since I have four children under the age of four who do not sit perfectly still for an hour at a time anywhere (but who are made to behave in church), I have been glared/stared at, lectured to, and made to feel most unwelcome and alien at the beautiful EF Mass, which is the main reason we do not take our family there very often at all.

    I repeat, it is often EF attendees who do the most to keep OF families from attending the EF Mass! Please prayerfully consider this and perhaps promote the good in the EF (of which there is much) and talk less about how icky OF Masses and people are!

    P.S. My husband and I voted straight pro-life/pro-family here in CA, and told our children why. I guess the OF didn’t mess-up our morals too badly after all…

  23. depeccatoradvitam says:

    It comes down to erroneously choosing the temporal safety of group-think vs. the time honored acceptance of the fullness of truth, Tradition and magisterial teachings.

    When collegiality becomes a voting block and an escape to commonality rather than the ascent of God, it lacks its intent and teaching accumen and simply becomes cowardly fraternal, distracting from the fullness of teachings, and in in doing so, it leads souls astray. This is the newfound idea of comfort as soft and chushy, easy going and non-confrontational.

    Collegiality and the reliance upon the strength of continued teaching brings strength. This is the original comfort, together with strength, clear and unambiguous which leads souls toward choosing that which is right.

    Sadly, the bishops also need to be with the Church as a whole, rather than as an enclave of US domesticism. They need to realize that they report to Peter and belong the Church as a whole, not a personal ghetto of their own doing, wanting and self-acculturation.

  24. Ken says:

    I don’t think it’s a stretch for one to point out that nobody (at least that we know of) who attends a traditional Latin Mass votes for a pro-abortion politican, and most Catholics who do not attend the traditional Latin Mass voted for the current pro-abortion president.

    Father Z observed a few months ago the trend in bishops who were friendly toward the traditional Latin Mass to be the ones speaking out on abortion and the election the most.

    Kristen J, I think you have several personal issues that should be discussed with a traditionally-minded priest, but perhaps a blog thread on Archbishop Burke’s comments today is not the best place for you to sort all this out.

  25. Kristen J says:

    “Kristen J, I think you have several personal issues that should be discussed with a traditionally-minded priest, but perhaps a blog thread on Archbishop Burke’s comments today is not the best place for you to sort all this out.”

    Ken, do you know me (or my priest, for that matter)? I don’t think so, but thanks for your heartfelt (?) concern in this public forum anyway. And, even more, thanks for proving my point about arrogant, holier-than-thou, and false statements by EF-attendees repelling OF-attendees. I couldn’t have proven my point as well as you just did.

    Furthermore, Ken, I am not the poster who brought form of Mass v. voting into this discussion. Perhaps a rabbit hole, but it needed to be dealt with. And, for the record, since my comment about voting as it relates to OF Mass attendance was apparently lost on at least one reader, my “OF morals” did not lead me to an immoral vote. Furthermore, I fully agree with Archbishop Burke.

    May God bless us all, those who attend the OF and the EF!

  26. Johnny Domer says:

    I pray for Archbishop Burke…I pray that he someday has a wardrobe consisting of nothing but white cassocks…and that he changes his name to Pius XIII.

    I guess it’s a longshot…but if there’s one American who could possibly be elected Pope, wouldn’t it be him!?

    Let’s pray for it, and heck, who knows?!

  27. Jake says:

    “In other words, as the result of having been deprived of the TLM, the majority of Latin Rite Catholics have lost their spiritual identities.”

    I highly doubt that theory. It seems pretty obvious to me that the socially conservative Catholics gravitate toward the TLM. I don’t think the liturgy is influencing how they vote, those that attend traditional Masses are going to be the ones that vote striclty pro-life anyway.

    I think that imposing the TLM on politically-liberal voting Catholics would do more harm than good (i.e., they’d just leave). This is extremely unpastoral…unless of course you don’t care if they leave. I personally prefer the EF, but wouldn’t want to see us loose the OF. The OF is afterall, still at least in essence is a product of the Council, and that can’t be denied. Reform the reform.

  28. Archbishop Burke is spot on, as they say in the UK.

    The catastrophe of the USCCB media office endorsing the move the Golden Compass proves that they need a major overhaul in the press and media dept. CNS is another place where new leadership is needed. They need an ORTHODOX person who will authentically and acurately report the news and reflect the Church to the secular media, rather than vice versa. Someone of Fr. Z’s caliber would do nicely.

  29. Fr. Trigilio: D’ya think there’s a chance? o{]:¬)

  30. Ken: trend in bishops who were friendly toward the traditional Latin Mass to be the ones speaking out on abortion

    It would be interesting to try to quantify that in some way. A good project for a college student!

  31. Christopher Sarsfield says:

    Unfortunately, Bishop Burke comes across as a Republican hack. When he stated in a newspaper interview that the Iraq War met the just war criteria, any credibility he would have had with serious non-Republican Catholics went out the window. Also his lack of admission with regard to how absolutely awful the presidential choices were did much to add to this view. Bishop Burke makes a good cheerleader, but he only has influence on those who would take the time to attend the pep rally.

  32. Christopher Sarsfield says:

    BTW, I should add that I think Archbishop Burke is absolutely correct in denying pro-abortion politicians communion. He is one of the few bishops that shows some backbone on this issue. That said it would play better if he also denied communion to all politicians that rejected the principles of just war, and it would be the consistently pro-life thing to do.

  33. Mary says:

    Well, the Dallas and Fort Worth bishops produced a fine joint statement for the elections, but neither of them are really what you could call “TLM-friendly,” unless one evening Sunday Mass in a bad part of town in Fort Worth, and two Sunday Masses in a chapel that holds 80 people sitting down when the congregation is about 120 for each Mass, counts as friendly… (There is also a daily Mass in Dallas, which is nice, but I heard that the Dallas apostolate is the one that has existed for the longest time without getting its own church in the whole US. Don’t know if that’s true.)

  34. Mary Jane says:

    When Archbishop Burke was moved to Rome, many people speculated that his “promotion” was to get him out of the US bishops’ hair. Well, I guess that didn’t work, did it?

  35. Dan says:

    “In other words, as the result of having been deprived of the TLM, the majority of Latin Rite Catholics have lost their spiritual identities.”

    “I highly doubt that theory. I don’t think the liturgy is influencing how they vote, those that attend traditional Masses are going to be the ones that vote striclty pro-life anyway.”

    We disagree. It is predominately from the Church’s Liturgy that we learn to think and behave like Catholics. That which people encounter week after week, day after day, in the Liturgy influences behavior.

    When Mass “A”, compared to Mass “B”, is considerably weaker in projecting the Catholic Faith…in projecting how to think and behave like a Catholic…then people who are exposed only to Mass “A” will be considerably weaker in the Faith. They will simply not understand how to behave like a Catholic.

    For Catholics, everything flows from the Mass. We had better return to Mass “B”.
    ———————

    “I think that imposing the TLM on politically-liberal voting Catholics would do more harm than good (i.e., they’d just leave). This is extremely unpastoral…unless of course you don’t care if they leave. I personally prefer the EF, but wouldn’t want to see us loose the OF. The OF is afterall, still at least in essence is a product of the Council, and that can’t be denied. Reform the reform.”

    I would like to see us lose the OF…but not overnight. Nobody is talking about the instant imposition of the EF on “liberals.”
    —————-

    “I don’t think the liturgy is influencing how they vote, those that attend traditional Masses are going to be the ones that vote striclty pro-life anyway.”

    I believe that the Liturgy influenced the manner in which they voted. And I believe that it’s the other way around from which you described.

    People who assist at the TLM, are inspired by the TLM to be or become and remain pro-life…rather than a person is pro-life, then seeks the TLM.

  36. wsxyz says:

    When he stated in a newspaper interview that the Iraq War met the just war criteria

    Christopher, do you have a link or reference to this?

  37. Christopher Sarsfield says:

    Took a while to find. The St. Louis Post website wanted $2.95 for the article!! but I found it here:

    http://catholiccitizens.org/press/contentview.asp?c=12402

    Relevant questions and answers:

    PD: Under Catholic Church doctrine, there is such thing as the “Just War theory.” Based on what you now know about the war in Iraq, would that be considered a “just war?”

    Burke: That’s a very difficult question. What the church teaches about the Just War theory is that there has to be a proportionate good that’s being served by going to war, and that as much as possible, the death of civilians, of innocent people has to be avoided. And with regard to the judgment about what is a just war or not, the church leaves that in the hands of the leaders of government.

    PD: But the church has taken a position on the war.

    Burke: What happened during the war on Iraq is that the Holy Father and the church’s position is always to say, we ought not to go to war. We ought to try every possible means not to go to war. And that’s what the Holy Father’s consistent message was. Now a couple of heads of our offices in the Holy See made very strong statements which seem to say that the war was unjust. However there was never any official position taken by the Holy Father himself instructing bishops in this country or anybody else that this was an unjust war.

    PD: What are your personal feelings about the war?

    Burke: I don’t think it was an unjust war. I’ve been very saddened about the aftermath of the war. I think we could have done much better in preparing to handle the situation with the fall of the regime of Saddam Hussein, but I cannot say in my own conscious that the war was unjust.

    PD: Could you expound on why you think the war was just?

    Burke: The reason that I would say it was a just war was the evil being perpetrated upon the Iraqi people by the government and also with its implications for the population of the world. In other words, what may have been the plans and so forth of Saddam Hussein for actions that would have impacted negatively on the general population. I know the big question is that these weapons of mass destruction were not found. I think that’s something that now has to be considered in terms of evaluating the whole war. But even if they were not found that does not mean that absolutely that it was an unjust war. I would say this, it had to be a very difficult decision to enter that conflict. I’m hoping that something better is going to happen in terms of the country building itself.

    PD: Opponents of the war would argue that if you use that same logic you applied to Saddam Hussein, there are other oppressive governments around the world. Would we justified to go into those places?

    Burke: I think that’s a valid point to be made. I happen to trust the judgment of the people who make those decisions. And it wasn’t only the United States, but several other nations were involved with regard to the danger which Saddam Hussein presented for world peace. Certainly the United States can’t be put in a position of policing the world, but there could be other instances where this might be indicated. But it’s a difficult situation to evaluate in Iraq and I’m certainly not in favor of these kinds of interventions.

    *** My comments*** Needless to say that many who felt the war was unjust, would not be looking to Bishop Burke for advice on moral theology. He seems to be advocating the idea of the morality of a preemptive strike as well. And his reasons for the justice of the war are poor, and do not come close to fulling the requirements for a just war.

  38. Michael says:

    Kudos to Archbishop Burke! I worship at the extrordinary form of The Holy Mass in southern California, thanks to the Norbertine priests who actually follow the Holy Father. The reason more people voted for Barack Obama / Joe Biden is because for many years now there has been mass dissent against The Church’s Teachings.
    There is so many people Catholic and non catholic in this country who don’t even know that The United States of America is a Constitutional Republic and there is a requirement of being a “Natural Born Citizen” of The United States of America (US Constitution Article II,section 1,clause 5)the term came from leading legal treatise “Law of Nations”(1758, E.Vattel Book1,chpt19,section212) for one to be President/vice president. This is safeguard for our nation and the office of the presidency from having allegiance to a foriegn power. If the people knew this and also voted against abortion/pro homosexual marriage canidate, Barack Obama wouldn’t have usurped the highest office in this nation and we would have had John McCain/Sarah Palin in office and the “Mexico City” policy wouldn’t have been revoked . We wouldn’t have our taxes supporting artifical birth control and abortion. The FOCA wouldn’t be an issue. Next on the plate for Obama/Biden/Pelosi and comrads is taking away our Constituional Right of Freedom of Speech and Right to bear arms. This is what they do in communist countries. They have already started to destroy our economy , to cause confusion, fear and retreat. One reason we will perish as a nation is for the lack of knowledge of Our Constituional Rights and there will be a communist takeover of this country through socialism. Barack Obama,Hillary Clinton as well as many priests and religious studied Sal Alinsky who was a Marxist ideolgue and activist who set out in his book “Rules For Radicals” how capitalism would be overthrown by the mobilzation of the masses and the whipping up their discontent. The strategy revolved around creating apparently moderate local organizations that would be manipulated by “community organizers” effectively deniable political agitators to forment grievance and dissent. Here are some of the “Rules”
    Rule #1- Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have.
    Rule #3- Wherever possible go outside the experience of the enemy. Here you want to cause confusion, fear, and retreat.
    Rule #5- Ridicule the man’s most potent weapon.
    Rule #6- Keep the pressure on, with different tactics and actions and utilize all events of the period for your purpose.
    Rule #11- If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside.
    Rule #13- Pick the target,freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.
    Think about how Barack Obama /Biden campaign used these “Rules” during the campaign and uses them now. Think about how dissenters in the Church uses these “Rules”.

    Dr. Alan Keyes is one good and faithful Catholic who is leading the way to educate people on this fact about Barack Obama.
    Wake up fellow, good and faithful Catholics of The United States of America. Don’t be fooled into Obama’s smooth talking agenda of an utopia. He is an usurper of the office of The Presidency who brings an anti-christ policy to this Nation. Study and live the Catholic Faith and study the US Constituiton while you’re at it!
    May God have mercy on us!

  39. Greg Smisek says:

    Has anybody started a fan club for His Excellency yet?

  40. ckdexterhaven says:

    Have any of you gone to the UCSSB website and checked out the ‘homily notes” they have? They have/had guidelines for priests for homilies on selected dates. The guidelines for October 26th (two weeks b4 the election) are chilling. Their “helpful” notes for the priests are RIFE with moral equivalence of social justice issues and abortion.

    Here’s the link: http://preview.tinyurl.com/bp885b

    If priests actually followed this advice, no wonder 50% of our fellow Catholics voted for Obama. Gee, thanks, UCSSB!

  41. wsxyz says:

    Thanks Christopher.

  42. Luigi says:

    Not to rain on the well-deserved parade; Abp. Burke is absolutely correct, but…

    While I very much appreciate His Excellency’s forthrightness now, I wonder how vocal he was about the inadequacy of Faithful Citezenship when he was still here.

    How often did he call CNS to the carpet for their quasi-Catholic editorial slant? CNS didn’t become a joke just last year folks; it has been an embarassment for a while.

    I honestly don’t know the answer to these questions, I just wonder.