Doug Kmiec again with my emphases and comments.
Seizing the moment at Notre Dame
By: Douglas W. Kmiec
April 14, 2009 04:35 AM ESTFather John Jenkins, the president of the University of Notre Dame, probably yearns for days past when the only angry messages waiting for him related to rehiring head football coach Charlie Weis for a fifth season after Weis’ dismal 6-6 performance in 2008. Today, Jenkins is being targeted [pooor pooor poooor Fr. Jenkins] not by bad sports but by conservative Catholics sporting really bad attitudes about Notre Dame’s decision to welcome the president of the United States to campus next month to serve as commencement speaker.
The president recently returned from an extraordinarily successful visit to world capitals in association with the G-20 summit. [Ummm … successful by whose criteria? I believe that the President wanted to gather support from European leaders, for example, for military efforts and got nowhere with them. He bowed to a Saudi King. He blamed America for various ills. Great success!] The massive crowds in cities from London to Prague waiting for hours to catch a glimpse [This is the criterion of successs?] of the 44th president would be baffled by the ND-Obama rancor.
Well-acquainted with abortion politics in America, Notre Dame’s graduating class is less confounded. [Isn’t that a bit of an assumption? How well-acquainted would those students be with the Catholic arguments?] Indeed, an overwhelming majority are delighted [Again, crowds really impress Kmiec. Numbers apparently guide his judgments.] by the opportunity to have their special moment embellished by Barack Obama’s intelligence and eloquence. [Sorry, but this smacks of a sycophant.]
Some of the reaction to Obama is still post-election sour grapes. [Once again, Kmiec chooses to look at the issue through the lens of party politics. That is not why Catholics are upset about what is going on at Notre Dame.] Obama netted 54 percent of the Catholic vote nationwide, including a sizable share in Notre Dame’s home state of Indiana, where he became the first Democratic presidential candidate since 1964 to win the Hoosier State’s electoral votes. [See? Again it’s all about the numbers and not whether something is right or wrong.] Obama’s victory loosened the grip the GOP had on middle-income families, a result of Ronald Reagan’s likable personality and his stance against an abortion rate in excess of 1 million per year.
Obama’s views supporting abortion rights and embryonic stem cell research are pragmatic. Obama knows this is less than the absolute legal prohibition demanded by the hierarchy of the Catholic Church in America. [A clear demonstration of where Kmiec stands.]
Obama successfully found some common ground during the campaign by advocating abortion reduction with enhanced economic and social support, especially for poor, uninsured and often unemployed women. In addition, the president advocates stronger families and teenage responsibility. [He is pragmatic.]
Not enough. Chicago’s Cardinal Francis George, who met with the president in the Oval Office on St. Paddy’s Day, can be seen on YouTube stirring up letter-writing and e-mail campaigns. [That is apparently a bad thing to do to The Wun. We must not stir discontent! We must … must…. we must… crawl… we must …. bow before his superior intellect… his eloquence…. oooooo] The local bishop in Indiana plans to boycott the graduation altogether.
Many Catholics, including this one, [Remember how important the numbers game is for Kmiec.] find it hard to reconcile this approach with the image of Christ in Matthew’s Gospel never turning away even “sinners and tax collectors,” though no one could blame Obama Cabinet officials for steering clear of tax collectors. [Riiiiiight… I wonder how much the IRS budget will be increased.] Jesus’ method was one of inclusion, teaching with generosity, forgiveness and truth — not snubbing those in high office. [Jesus didn’t snub anyone in high office?]
Of course, the truth of unborn life is disputed inside and outside the church. [It is, in fact, disputed. But the fact that there is a dispute doesn’t justify dissent.] Catholic teaching insists that the personhood of the unborn child is not just a matter of faith but of objective science and the natural moral law available to all. Science does confirm that the first fertilized cell is unique and different from mother and father. But scientists do not claim to establish when legal personhood begins — that, most say, remains a political judgment. For me, it is faith informed by love [how does he sleep?] — but that’s for another column. [Let’s think. “Science does confirm that the first fertilized cell is unique and different from mother and father…”. Excuse me, but science confirms a lot more than that the fertilized cell is unique and different from mother and father. How about science’s affirmation that the fertilized cell is alive, that it contains all the basic codes necessary for developing into a child capable of living outside of the mother’s womb, and that it, and not the mother, determines its own progress toward birth? “But scientists do not claim to establish when legal personhood begins — that, most say, remains a political judgment.” Duh! Of course scientists don’t make that claim. Legal personhood, by definition, is well…. a legal, and therefore, political judgment. What scientists can do is to affirm that the embryo and fetus constitute human life. What the Catholic Church teaches is that human life is a continuum from conception to natural death. Just as this life from the embryonic stage gradually takes on greater and greater capacities, older human beings gradually lose many of those capabilities as they approach death. If legal personhood can be denied to an embryo, it can be denied to an elderly human being suffering any number of debilitations. Sooo… will someone please explain how this guy Kmiec was ever considered a pro-life advocate?]
Will Obama talk about these differences at ND? He is courageous enough to do so, [he’s so dreamy…] and he is overdue for a Catholic moment. [an empty phrase] Unlike his masterful dominance [he’s such a dreamboat…] of the rest of the national conversation, Obama has let the right wing frame his post-election ties to the Catholic constituency.
For example, when Obama suspended George W. Bush’s hastily drafted eleventh-hour conscience clause regulations, the word went out that this was the end of Catholic hospitals. Not so, but to make the point, the Obama team needed to highlight well-established federal and state laws that already permit medical personnel with moral and religious objection to refrain from abortion practice. [That’s right… Obama is all about protecting the consciences of Catholics.]
Of equal importance is reminding America of how his administration has already assumed the mantle of Catholicism [WHAT?!? The Obama Admin. has "assumed the mantle of Catholicism"?] in winding down the war in Iraq, establishing a greater social safety net for the poor, setting out a bold plan for eliminating nuclear weapons and jump-starting a serious interfaith conversation with Islam, long sought by the Holy Father himself. [Here’s one of the real points of this article: “Of equal importance is reminding America of how his administration has already assumed the mantle of Catholicism in winding down the war in Iraq, establishing a greater social safety net for the poor, setting out a bold plan for eliminating nuclear weapons and jump-starting a serious interfaith conversation with Islam, long sought by the Holy Father himself.” “Already assumed the mantle of Catholicism”? And how does Pres. Obama do this? 1) “Winding down the war in Iraq”. Not quite. First of all, didn’t the One promise during the campaign to withdraw all US troops within 90 days of taking office? The latest estimate from the White House is 2011. And if anyone deserves credit for winding down the war in Iraq, it’s George W Bush and his faith in The Surge. 2) “Establishing a greater social safety net for the poor”: Where? What net? 3) “Setting out a bold plan for eliminating nuclear weapons”: This must be a reference to his speech in Prague, in which he said he wanted to eliminate nuclear weapons. So where’s the “bold plan” to accomplish this? 4) “Jump-starting a serious interfaith conversation with Islam, long sought by the Holy Father himself”: Right. And where did The Wun do the jump-starting? Or is this a reference to his remark in Turkey that we are not at war with Islam and that the US is not a nation of Christians, or Jews or Muslims, but of citizens. Yes, I can see the Holy Father jumping up and clapping like ardent-Catholic Pelosi at hearing this.]
At Notre Dame, Obama might remind all of us not to make the perfect the enemy of the good. [Creeepy… I use this phrase on the blog and in conversations all the time. I feel like a need a shower now.] On May 17, as he stands at the foot of Our Lady’s Golden Dome, it will be 85 years to the day the Notre Dame Irish beat back the lit torches of Ku Klux Klan hatred that had spilled onto the campus. Three-quarters of a century ago, plus 10 years, the “fighting Irish” defeated the ignorance and prejudice of the KKK with their fists. [What just happened… is he suggesting that resistance to Pres. Obama is racial? Are people putting pressure on ND now version of the KKK?]
Today, they and we are blessed to use our minds — if they are open.
Loading ...
One’s mind must not be so open that all the brains fall out. There’s being open to HIS words and being open to man’s words.
Listening to folks like Kmiec and Fr. Jenkins in their overlong and subtly parsed apologia, I can’t help but think they’ve bought into the phrase ‘It’s better to rule in Hell than serve in Heaven’.
Cool so the KKK burned a cross on the steps of my Dad’s church when he was a kid, but I am like a KKK member for opposing the O from speaking/being honored at Notre Dame. Cool beans.
Seriously how does he sleep at night? How can he claim to speak for any group of Catholics when all he is doing is adoring Obama, while attacking bishops and faithful Catholics!
Wow Bad Catholics apparently are the greater enemy.
“assumed the mantle of Catholicism”
I really hate to say it, but just who does this guy worship, anyway? It reads like he’s trying to be Pope Douglas I, Vicar of Barack and head of the “Patriotic Catholic” Church.
Perhaps the good Professor is in actuality acting the “Trojan Horse” in order to be chosen for the Supreme Court vacancy which is sure to come in due course. Then, to everyone’s surprise, he joins the other Catholics (the 5 on the Court) only to be to the right of Scalia, Thomas and Roberts?
Well, it could happen! It could…I hope… Maybe we should pray for that?
D.v.
Mark my words: drawing an analogy between Barry Huss’s critics and the Ku Klux Klan is EXACTLY the object. Anyone who disagrees with MUST hate. Anyone who criticizes him MUST be a crazed hater. This is the face of the coming persecution, manned by the cadres of Acorn and Americorps, the Obamite answer to Blackwater, already distinguished by their trip to too the hoomes of corporate executives – addresses provided by…wh? – where they badgered and threatened them with death. Get ready, Catholic America. Barry the Huss is turning his gaze on us. You better be ready to stare right back (while saying the Rosary, of course).
God Save Pope Benedict XVI. Our Lady of Victories, intercede for him.
I’m thinking Mr. Kmiec is long overdue for a little talking to from his bishop. He’s sounding more and more like another cookie cutter leftist dissenter.
Forgive me, for I believe in Father Z’s exhortations to be charitable when we comment, and I need some instruction and assistance in doing so…especially after I read anything by Doug Kmiec anywhere.
It is seeming more and more to me that Kmiec has ordained himself the spokesman for the modernist, relativist, cafeteria arm of the Church in the USA today…apologizing for pro-abortion Catholics in office, touting the virtues of our quasi-socialism and the sleight-of-hand (mouth?) artists who are promulgating it to the very great disservice and dis-advantage of fellow Catholics everywhere.
You may be as weary of being reminded that the majority of Catholics voted for Mr. Obama, as am I. Here’s the more telling statistic, though: what percentage of faithful, practicing (you know, seven sacraments, Mass every weekend…minimum, grace, etc… all of those anachronisms that “modern” and “enlightened” (so-called) Catholics eschew)Catholics actually voted for our current regime. I would suggest that if those polled could be screened by their faithful practice of faith, the numbers would be significantly more lop-sided.
You can call yourself a Catholic; that does not make you one. You may have been raised Catholic…you might wander into Mass on Christmas and/or Easter, or for a family wedding or funeral, but that doesn’t make you a Catholic. It makes you a former Catholic.
I think the chief intellectual error made by the cafeteria crowd is the exercise in consensus…that since many people disagree with something (e.g., American “Catholics” and contraception, etc.) that the Church should adjust to “reflect the times”. They fundamentally misunderstand the concept of the authority with which Christ invested his Church on earth.
A brilliant, old priest who assisted me in returning to my faith a few decades ago…told me that in his seminary studies they had a term for those indviduals who agreed with 75-90% of what the Church teaches. In anticipation, I expected to learn some obscure term, probably in greek or latin, when he followed by saying, “Yeah, we call ’em protestants!”
I know everyone is at a different place on the path. I ask everyone reading this to pray for Mr. Kmiec, as well as other apostate and heretical influencers, like Father (necktie) McBrien (at NDU), Father Jenkins, Mr. Obama, and especially for all the politicians who claim to be Catholic and yet advance and promote the abortionists’ agenda so agressively that the notion is absurd…Kennedy, Cuomo, Giuliani, Daley, Schwarzenegger, Biden, Pelosi, etc…you know who they are. Please pray for them all!
Thank you for your patience with me and my disagreeable temper where defending the Faith is concerned. I will work to be more charitable. May God bless you all.
One word to describe Kmiec….blowhard!
Sheesh…..
You tell ’em, Fr. Z!
Eloquent? Only when teleprompted, and even then, not always.
He absolutely refuses to admit that anything Obama does is just wrong. It’s breathtaking. He is so convinced of Obama’s personal greatness that he will not admit anything he does is just wrong–not the removal of conscience protections, not the stem cell change, not the reversal of the Mexico City policy, nothing. He’ll characterize as “pragmatic” policies which involve the direct funding of murder. He is one of the most talented mental gymnasts I’ve ever seen perform.
It particularly disgusts me how he feels he has the authority to pass judgement on Cardinal George and Bishop D’Arcy for their well-thought-out, well-reasoned, PRINCIPLED positions (and, by extension, the other 31 bishops who have spoken on the issue). Does he think that Bishop D’Arcy, in what is possibly his last year as bishop, WANTS to be absent from the commencement, an event he has attended every year for 25 years? If there is anyone who shows an authentic love and respect for the University, and a true concern for its well-being and betterment, it’s John D’Arcy.
Kmiec’s remarks show how profoundly a large portion of the populace has fallen for the supposed charisma of the “One”. He is deluded into thinking Obama can do no wrong when, in actual fact, Obama has shown by his past and present behavior that he can, in fact, do wrong and proudly so (pro abortion history). What an incredible lapse in judgment by Kmiec!
How does he feel able to write this and call himself Catholic? Heirarchy of Truths? I think not; what could be higher on the list that the inviolability of human life, each and every one unique and bearing the image of God? I’d like to know where he feels “personhood” begins – 24 weeks? or maybe less than that? When the child is sentient? When the child can live independently of the mother? As we English would say: “Pull the other one”!
My advice to him would be: stop being so arrogant as to substitute your judgement for that of holy Mother Church, stop pouring scandal on Her by confusing Her faithful and seeking to undermine Her teaching. You will have to answer for the souls who were convinced by you, Mr Kmiec, and if the killing of an unborn child occurs as a result of your careless talk, God help you.
I have yet to meet a liberal “Catholic” who believes that Jesus is God the Son. Not believing that, in these peoples mindset, means that anything goes. Kmiec only magnifies this.
One thing’s for sure: those Notre dame Irishmen of yore who Kmiec writes about would have sniffed out a traitorous Castle Catholic like him in a second flat.
It’s also worth remembering that the KKK was the terrorist wing of the Democrat Party – whose most senior office holder in Congress today is one-time Exalted Cyclops, Robert Byrd.
Mark my words: drawing an analogy between Barry Huss’s critics and the Ku Klux Klan is EXACTLY the object. Anyone who disagrees with MUST hate. Anyone who criticizes him MUST be a crazed hater.
This is indeed an orchestrated campaign, as Michelle Malkin reports. This is frightening stuff and Kmiec seems to be doing his bit. I am a long-term America-phile but I have to say friends: your country is becoming less and less recognisable as the USA.
Part of the divide between concerned Catholics and figures like Kmiec is around this whole notion of Jesus’ “method of inclusion.” Jesus WAS inclusive in the sense that he socialized with tax collectors, adulterers, and other types of sinners. He was NOT inclusive in the sense that he ignored or excused their sin. Jesus explained his table fellowship by saying that he came to those who were sick and in need of a physician. So, if ND’s invitation to Obama is an extension of Jesus’ “inclusivenes” then they should be upfront with Obama about the fact that they think he’s sick and in need of spiritual healing. That’s clearly not the intent of ND’s invitation, though, as they are bestowing upon Obama an honorary degree. This approach to Obama would be analogous to Jesus celebrating Herod Antipas’ unlawful marriage to his brother’s wife, Herodius.
When dissenting Catholics try to take the moral high ground by appealing to Jesus’ inclusive example, we have to remind them just how wide of a chasm there is between Jesus’ actual ministry and their own practice of ignoring (and, in some cases, justifying) moral evil.
Glug! Glug! Glug! Keep drinking the kool-aid Kmiec. Thats right. Its good medicine. You don’t have to woorryyy about a thing. Its just “right-wing” extremists opposed to the won. Its just “right-wing” extremists who are opposed to the “won’s” pro-abortion agenda. SIGH! He’s so handsome! Glug! Glug! Glug!
All hail Big Brother!
Seriously, this is sad. He is so duped. All we can do is pray that he will open his eyes to see how dangerous this administration is to us and all devout Catholics, protestants, etc. He is skirting the issue. A “Catholic” university can not call itself Catholic and warmly invite pro-abortion speakers to give commencement speeches and receive honorary degrees.
Wow.
I sort of understood, but disagreed with, his rationale
for voting for Obama in the first place. But now
it look as if he has really drunk the Kool-Aid.
Let’s pray mightily for the Holy Spirit to enlighten him.
This sounds trite, but this man really needs all our prayers. He’s been completely deceived. Pray that he gets back in touch with reality and stops making a complete wally of himself.
The real irony of Kmiec’s comments is that the incident with the KKK to which he refers had nothing to do with race: it had everything to do with hatred of Catholics. People tend to forget that the Klan targeted Catholics just as often as blacks—in fact, the 20th century revival of the Klu Klux Klan was driven by hostility to Catholic immigrants, not primarily by hostility to black Americans (not that the Klan was great fans of them either). In 1924 the Klan came to South Bend with hopes of torching Notre Dame, which was somewhat more of a national Catholic icon then than now. It took all of Fr. Walsh’s efforts to maintain some semblance of order and security. There’s an excellent book.
Yet who’s attacking the Church now?
Somehow, when I die, I am not expecting to hear “Well done, thou good and pragmatic servant…”
reports that Kmiec was submitted for the Holy See…
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/14/vatican-vetoes-obama-nominees-abortion
“Of equal importance is reminding America of how his administration has already assumed the mantle of Catholicism”…
I’ve never been so appalled and disgusted at the same time! Wherever this guy came from, he needs to go back… ASAP! I wish Liechtenstein didn’t have such strict immigration laws…
As I have noted on my own blog, the big newspapers
find “Catholic” reporters to bash those who are
telling the truth about Notre Dame and numerous other
situations that are abhorrent to all right orthodox
Catholics.
Bishop Popracki recently published an editorial on
this very issue in the Chicago Tribune, a newspaper
that is notorious with regard to bashing Catholics.
Now that President Obama is causing controvery,
the Tribune sees itself in a position to “defend”
its native son by going after the Catholic Church.
I’m sorry, but Cardinal George and the bishops that
have petitioned the Holy Cross fathers are in the right.
No person, Kmiec or otherwise, can change my opinion.
And nasty reporting also never did anyone favors.
Maybe all that talk about mind-control and the CIA from back in 60s and 70s has more in reality than we thought. That can be the only explanation for this.
Kmiec is a prime example of “liberalism is a mental disorder.” Fortunately, the withdrawal of contribution by Notre Shame alumni will speak louder than this pathetic mouthpiece of apostasy. I’m surprised he didn’t use his favorite whipping boy: “right-wing bloggers.”
Jackson, I believe you are correct. Liberal ideas beget other liberal ideas. I am so sick of hearing the so-called Catholics tell me that a “fetus” is “potentially” a person.
I know I shouldn’t be too astonished by anything that comes out of Kmiec’s mouth/pen, but I cannot believe he is casting faithful Catholics as the KKK and Obama (and/or himself?) as the champion defending Notre Dame against the torches!
Our country is turning upside down. May Our Lady the Immaculate Conception pray for us that something good will come of all this!
This is so sick. It kills me to see Kmiec sink deeper and deeper into the hands of Satan.
Today, they and we are blessed to use our minds — if they are open.
Yes! Open minds! That’s what this is ALL about (***note EXTREME scarcasm here, and throughout***)
Why, we need to be so open-minded that we not only shun the Truth of Christ and His Church, but are willing to accept any claptrap foisted at us by a man who can read from a teleprompter. Oh, how enlightened are we if we just keep an open mind so that our brains fall out and we become slaves to sin and immorality!
As Heather said, my prayer is that some good comes from this mess and that those who call evil good and good evil repent.
Once again, we hear the same distorted liberal view of the Faith: that all wars are unjust (except those started by a Democrat), that only government can care for the poor, that deterrence is immoral, and that ecumenism really means admitting that Christianity is to some degree wrong.
He forgot to throw in capital punishment.
A reminder from Cardinal Ratzinger in 2004:
Father Z,
Answering Mr. Kmieck just gives him the undeserved attention he craves. He calls himself a “Catholic” but does not adhere to the faith handed down from the Apostles. I think we should simply ignore him and focus instead on giving witness to our Faith.
The “Catholic Review”, the newspaper of the Archdiocese of Baltimore ran a column by Kmiec a couple of weeks back which ran in a similar Wormtongue-esque vein about our marvelous Barrack. In his defense of The Eloquent One, Kmiec mentioned that he himself suffered from Parkinson’s. This was news to me, but brought everything into focus. A frightened man willing to strike a deal with the devil (ahem) to increase his chances of a healthy life. Very sad.
Of course it is also sad that an archdiocesan paper would run such an article, but that is a rant for another topic.
“…But scientists do not claim to establish when legal personhood begins…”
The problem here is that, for the federal government, legal personhood begins with the attachment of a social security number. You’re nothing to the federal government without your Taxpayer’s ID, which is acquired following birth, and you won’t be spared by any federal law before you’re one of its citizen-taxpayers…The U.S. government should not have this life-and-death power over the unborn!
Thomas, that is a disgraceful comment.
Wow, is this guy off the rails or what? Can a Catholic layman be placed under interdict by his bishop for publishing trash like this?
Belief in the Church must be all or nothing.
Once Kmiec abandoned the faith of the Apostles on one matter, it was only a matter of time before he abandoned the true faith on all matters and turned to worshiping pagan idols (often idols of one’s self, or whomever one agrees with). In order to justify his initial dissent, further dissents on other matters remain required.
Eventually one arrives at a quasi-atheistic-paganism, where the individual is elevated to the status of God. And only then do they find any semblance of righteousness, after the long long trek away from it. However, the new righteousness is self-righteousness. The newly minted pagan believes only in themselves (or in this case, in Obama), and all their previously immoral activity and beliefs is now 100% justified, and so the individual is always righteous no matter what they do.
It is the dictatorship of relativism, just as Pope Benedict explained. And Doug Kmiec, you are championing it.
O, Doug Kmiec, return to your God.
This really is a depressing read. He’s totally bought into it.
Although I would disagree with Fr. Z in that I don’t believe that bowing to a monarch (however inappropriate the protocol – and it IS inappropriate) and acknowledging that America has made various mistakes which have harmed our international reputation are solid criteria in evaluating the success (or failure) of the President’s trip, any moreso than the numbers with which Kmiec seems so taken. Not getting the Europeans to sign onto his economic ideas is a much more solid criterion, I believe.
Shane O’Neill, I am not sure that I would classify Thomas’ comment about Kmiec’s health “disgraceful.” I think it might provide a partial explanation
for his support for Obama. After all, if you believe that embryonic stem cell research may hold the key to regaining your health, you might just
compromise your principles. It’s happened before. Tom
ps; Kmiec has grown tiresome.
Dougie should learn the fine art of taking a breath between those big gulps of Obamacide Kool-Aid. Pathetic.
Fr. Philip, OP
Unfortunately every time Dr Kmiec opens his mouth or puts pen to paper he makes it more difficult to believe his Catholic good faith.
And with regards to whatever good things Obama is doing or intends to do, a bottle of wine with a drop of sewage in it has become something other than a bottle of fine wine.
Father Z, please stop. Please, please, stop being so disrespectful of the President. “The Wun”… “so dreamy”… etc etc.
You are a smart guy, and a priest of God, and you can carry on this debate with charity and intelligence.
You are not Bill O’Reily or Howard Stern. Let those crude men run up their ratings by talking like adolescents.
You have a different ministy. And you are a better man than they.
You call us beautifully to transcendence in liturgy. If you want to venture into public policy, please offer us the same eloquence and insight. [Good luck with your own blog where you get to post what you think is best!]
I suppose Kmiec’s “Smiley face” Jesus is a pretty pragmatic god? He is worshipping a false image of God. Jesus, unlike Barrack or Dougie, cared not for the esteem of man. For what benefit has this man sold his soul?
“mantle of Catholicism”
Yes, I have known those who claim to be Catholic–perhaps with the ‘mantle’–and yet dissent on many doctrines. One group I have known were the ‘peace and justice’ ones. Never would you catch them with a rosary! Or praying at an abortion mill. Or making a holy hour. But you would find them protesting a missal silo or parading for open borders or something like that–equal wages for Panamanians or something. And with parish and diocesan money too.
Lots of folks say they are Catholic but do not follow Church teachings and they will go with the flow of the world, but hopefully will wise up before perdition claims them.
“Obamacide Kool Aid.” ROFLOL! Kudos, Father Philip! Tom
Shane O’Neill,
I am sorry you took my comment so. Tom was right that it was merely offered to explain, perhaps, the man’s thinking, and he is also right that it is not so unusual for a person to turn out to be so self serving.
I feel no disgrace for interpreting the situation in this way; I feel sadness. Sad that the man so suffers, and sadder still that, if I am correct, he is so terrified that he is abandoning his faith. Facing a life-altering condition is difficult- I know personally- and facing the prospect of a cure provided through immoral means is depressing-this I know personally too. My child suffers from Type I diabetes, and I used to pray for a cure, until the focus of finding a cure shifted to embryonic stem cells. Now I pray they will not find a cure, at least not that way, for how will I tell my child that she cannot be cured when a cure exists? So if you find my suggestion toward Kmiec disgraceful, please forgive me: it may be tinged some bitterness toward a fellow-“Catholic” who is making my life just that much harder.
Mr. Kmiec takes the meaning of “Useful Idiot” to unbelievably new heights. Herman Goebbels eat your heart out. This guy isn’t interested in a SCOTUS post, he wants to be the new Minister of Propaganda.
Kmiec writes about “the image of Christ in Matthew’s Gospel never turning away even “sinners and tax collectors,” though no one could blame Obama Cabinet officials for steering clear of tax collectors”
He’s so full of himself that he misses the point that Jesus called all to conversion and to “sin no more” (as he tells the adulteress). He dined with prostitutes, sinners, and tax collectors to minister to them, to demonstrate compassion but also he wanted conversion of hearts. The granting of a degree to this POTUS does not guarantee a reversion, or a conversion on such polarizing issues as abortion and conscience laws. It really is the University groveling to the President. Worse, it is a clear demonstration of blatantly ignoring obvious Catholic doctrine!
I’m afraid I have to agree with Virgil’s post. However much you may disagree with President Obama, we should try to remain civil and dispense with the unnecessary sarcasm. We’re supposed to be better than that as practicing Catholics. We can disagree and still be charitable and civil. I feel that some of the comments are more suited for Fox News than a Catholic blog.
I had never really heard of this guy, Kmiec, before he endorsed Obama. Was he actually respected before that because he seems really not very bright at all?
Perhaps some would prefer the civility of Mr. Kmiec’s blog, if he has one? I think the comments posted here are within the bounds of a Catholic blog. By commenting on the false arguments of Mr. Kmiec, Fr. Z provides us with a rational defense against those who feel similar to Mr. Kmiec. I read these blogs to become more informed. I agree that we should offer our prayers for the likes of Pres. Obama and Doug Kmiec. Again I ask: Is it too medieval to think that a call for mass prayer and fasting for a miracle or apparition of the Virgin to bring conversions to all those who agree with Barry and Doug at Notre Shame?
Sycophant indeed. Pilate = pragmatic; Chrst = farthest from pragmatic.
Ciao, ancora, Father Z.
Unfortunately, I have neither the time nor the funding for a blog. [If you choose, you can start a blog for free. Try WordPress. Time is only a problem if you want to post a lot and allow discussion.] Nor do I think my insights particularly interesting to a public. Nor am I a priest.
You are a priest. And you have a public. And you have insights worth sharing. [Right… don’t forget that “frank commentary on Catholic issues” at the top.]
Making fun of liturgical dancers in spandex is cute. Maybe a wee bit beneath the dignity of a priest, but well within the bounds of internicene rivalry. [I thought you weren’t a priest… but you seem to know all about what is appropriate for priests.]
But making fun of Presidents (of nations and of universities) is not a ministry. [And you get to define that. Okay.]
You have the insights. You can share them and make a difference. Energize your little flock here as good Catholic apologists, not cranky bitter adolescents. [Actually, all you havfe done is guide the discussion into a rabbit hole about me. No more, thanks anyway! o{]:¬) ]
roxanne- that’s not what Virgil and Art are talking about. The hatred for
Obama- the venom spewing forth from priests and posters-is unbelievable.
When I have issues with the tone of a blog post, I generally contact my host privately via email, if it seems worth doing, as opposed to admonishing them publicly in their own comment threads.
Art, or MSNBC, CNN, CBS, NBC, ABC right? Tom
Kmiec: Of course, the truth of unborn life is disputed inside and outside the church.
When you write things as nonsensical as this sentence, anything goes, — and apparently does.
Of equal importance is reminding America of how his administration has already assumed the mantle of Catholicism in winding down the war in Iraq, establishing a greater social safety net for the poor, setting out a bold plan for eliminating nuclear weapons and jump-starting a serious interfaith conversation with Islam
Um, Obama has done nothing to “wind down the war in Iraq.” Our military’s success has done that. A greater social safety net for the poor? LOL By making all of us poorer through punitive taxation so as to fund his unprecedented, wealth-killing national debt! A bold plan for eliminating nuclear weapons indeed, when he did nothing to reprimand the NK or Iranian regimes, or to stabilize Pakistan, which has 100 nukes or more. His weakness emboldens those adversaries instead of pacifying them! It is “bold” in so far as it demonstrably jeopardizes us! And last, Catholics have been “conversing” with Islam for centuries, and we know very well where we stand.
Really I don’t think Fr. Z’s comments have come anywhere near to the level of vileness seen on cable news from both sides. Secondly I’m sure many priest bloggers and lay bloggers who have come out strongly on issues around Obama are holding back, they are a little snide, but if they went and laid out a manifesto against Obama and his buds I’m sure it would be pretty scathing. Also rememeber people like St. Jerome were known to be extreemly scathing (even at times snide, or sarcastic) in their arguements against heritics. So is what these bloggers doing bad… in the big picture no. Don’t get all butthurt over a few snide comments. There are much bigger things to worry about like what the governments of the West are doing right now (evil things with big O leading the pack of them).
Virgil, have you succumbed to the error of Presidential impeccability? Perhaps then you also subscribe to the error of Wall Street impeccability, since Obama is merely a Wall Street prop.
From the Guardian link posted by Tertullian above:
The Vatican also rejected another potential nominee, Douglas Kmiec, a professor of constitutional law at Pepperdine University and former head of the office of legal counsel for Presidents Ronald Reagan and George Bush Sr. Kmiec, a Republican who endorsed Obama during the last election campaign, has said that Catholics who support the right to abortion need not follow the church’s admonition to vote for an anti-abortion presidential candidate.
I suspect Kmiec’s screeds against the Church will escalate.
Fr. Z,
is he suggesting that resistance to Pres. Obama is racial? Are people putting pressure on ND now version of the KKK?
No, he’s suggesting that this invitation is the culmination of Fr. Hesburgh’s life-long support of civil rights.
I would bet that nothing big gets done at ND without Fr. Hesburgh’s explicit or implicit approval. He would like to welcome President Obama, and you can be sure that photo opp will not be missed. ND officials will do nothing to prevent that photo opp from happening.
That, I wager, is a lot of what this is all about — in addition to sticking it to campus conservatives right in the eye.
It seems that the progressives in our country are revving up their alternate magisterium. The opposition to their project is demonized as “KKK”, to be beaten back with the fists of the masses. In the minds of some this takeover of the true magisterium seems to be a fait accompli, and America only needs to be “reminded” of it (hence the frequent repetition of numbers). Classic Alinsky – demonize, divide, scare, bluff, repress, and then rule. ND is the chosen symbol of their dominance.
The question in my mind is, by using such tactics, will they try to force a formal schism in our Church next, or will they keep an intact but empty shell to maintain an illusion of normalcy? I bet on the latter. A lot depends on the faith of our Bishops right now…
Unbelievable hatred? I think you exaggerate Joe. I don’t hate Obama, but I do fear him. I believe he is advancing an evil and diabolical agenda that will kill innocents by the thousands, destroy the family and persecute the Church. Christ made clear to Saul that when you persecute His Church, you persecute Him. Thus Obama is anti-Christ. Plain and simple. A priest of Christ betrays his vocation if he does not attack that evil. Fr. Z does so with a side of humor and sarcasm. The last time I checked sarcasm wasn’t one of the Thou shalt not’s tha Moses ported down from Sinai.
As for Kmiec and his ilk: those who identify themselves as Catholics, yet defend and support this president, and his evil, are at best deluded and at worst liars. One cannot be pragmatic about evil. The Church; the Popes could not be clearer about the intrinsic evil of abortion. They are crystal on the priority of stopping abortion. It is evil # 1 and all other political footballs (capital punishment, welfare, war) are secondary to it.
Mark – I love your analysis, but other than the noisome Kmiec, Richard McBrien and Fr Thomas Reese, I haven’t noticed any large-scale resurgence of The Sickness.
Virgil,
Is this not still a free country? You can’t tell Fr. Z or anyone else what to say here. This is Fr. Z’s blog and he decides. So if you don’t like what you read on certain threads, then don’t read them. Pretty much as simple as that.
PS, Liturgy isn’t just some pretty little trifle that has nothing to do with the rest of the world. Liturgy speaks volumes on every level to those who have ears to hear. The more universal and beautiful it is, the more eloquently and precisely it speaks–and the more it asks.
Honestly, and you’d ought to think about this a bit–you sound just like Fr. Jenkins. He can’t think deeper than 1/2 inch into the whole Obamam issue either. HE thinks that Obama’s evil and Obama’s honors can exist side-by-side and not affect each other. Both you guys need to find some extra strong coffee and wake up.
Fidelius,
Father Hesburgh is over 90 and no longer has much control over things at Notre Dame. However, I agree that if he is on campus that day there will be a big photo
opt featuring him and Abortion King aka President Obama. Catholics who support Obama are not really Catholic, they just think they are.
Tom
TJM,
MSNBC could certainly be placed in the same category. Fox News definitely doesn’t have a monopoly on ad hominem attacks in cable television. Thanks for pointing that out.
Art, thanks for responding. But in truth and in fact, the other channels I mentioned could too. I guess you haven’t seen Good Morning America or the
View. Those shows engage in ad hominem attacks all the time, provided the target is a Republican or Catholic. Tom
There are two churches under this one roof. It’s been that way for some time. This is just one more display of that.
” I believe he is advancing an evil and diabolical agenda that will kill innocents by the thousands, destroy the family and persecute the Church.”
Obama is not initiating this, my friend, it is, sadly, already in place and practice.
“Christ made clear to Saul that when you persecute His Church, you persecute Him. Thus Obama is anti-Christ. Plain and simple.”
And if this is true- that Obama is the anti-Christ- the good ones are already in God’s care ( see Revelations) which means- Lord have mercy….we’ve been Left Behind!
His perspective is in lock step with the new administration. His suggestion, carefully phrazed but noticed by Fr Z, that any resistance to the WUN is “radical” is consistent with a just released Department of Homeland Security assertion that those who value the Consitution and their rights under the Bill of Rights (specifically the 2nd ammendment) may constitute a threat to national security. For the left it is all about re-defining … we don’t have a war on terrorism any more but we have a war on right wingers. The Catholic Church (that is those members who are orthodox) is also a target of that war and the professor is leading the charge against the Church.
How long will it take before enough people recognize the parallels between the annointed WUN and Hitler? Hopefully we will wake up quicker than the German people and the rest of the world did just prior to WW II.
Father you tried your best to unravel the faulty thinking of Mr. Kmiec but it can’t be unraveled…good try though. Most of Kmiec’s underlying assumptions are abusrd, the underlying ‘facts’ are not facts, the vacuous account of Church teaching regarding life is almost fraudulent, the scriptural remarks are out of context (didn’t Chesterton say something about heresy recognizing some truth to the exclusion of the full truth—and I’m not saying Kmiec is a heretic but his scriptural discipline is something out of the 60s). I’m amazed really at what passes for even the apearance of ‘academic’ discourse. I’ve often found it difficult to engage with clinical leftists for all the reasons found in Kmiec’s apologia.
Finally, he’s in denial and, for all his defiant contortions about his emperor king, at the end of the day his source of adulation voted stridently and repeatedly against ‘born alive’ and literally in favor of infanticide. So much for ‘legal personhood.’
It’s not a matter of there being two churches or even two opinions, at least as far as I’m concerned. I think most of us agree that Notre Dame should not honor President Obama in this way because it’s a flagrant act of disobedience of the Bishops’ Conference directives and calls into question the church’s stance on abortion and its commitment to life. However, that doesn’t mean the President should be vilified as the Antichrist.
The many lawyers I have worked with over the years often admitted they didn’t “do numbers.” Kmiec, over his head in so many ways.
Virgil
Fr Z’s comments, beside the fact that this is his blog and he can say what he wants, are dead on the money. Maybe if you understood the very serious nature of the war that BO and his cohorts are intentionally waging against the last bastion of morality (the true teachings of the Catholic Church)you would appreciate that the politically correct approach does not work. The U S Bishops have tried the soft approach for decades and it has accomplished nothing. It is time ALL true Catholics took off the gloves and that we call it like it is. Mr. Obama happens to hold the office of President. I respect the office but I have absolutely no respect for him at all. He and his administration are enemies of morality, and enemies of the Church. Where I come from the only way you deter enemies is by making them fear you. The strongest possible, legal, resistance to BO is the only way to achieve any level of fear on his part or that of his liberal cohorts.
Oh,my. This is not gonna go anywhere that is edifying or unifying and will probably culminate as fodder for another archbishop’s chiding.
Fr. Z, with both candor and respect, you really got too emotional over this Kmiec pseudo-Catholic. I could hardly read what he said for your inflamed commentary. ( And, yes, it is your blog,but I fear for your health.)You can’t change what is already errantly decided. I believe Notre Dame has tried to re-birth itself as a Harvard or Yale of the Midwest.Let it go. It is not worth your having a heart attack or stroke over.
It is time now to take a deep breath….and start finding pictures of birds or spring blooms that I know are prolific now on the Sabine Farm. A recipe or two would be calming- to everyone. ( But please refrain from putting a fatty meat- like the lamb-on potatoes.Cook them separately in a pan with a drizzle- not a pouring- of olive oil. Season with a Greek- blend seasoning or a rosemary-based blend. Too much fat will clog the arteries).
And like Joe said- if our president is the anti-Christ, we all could be lost. But it is Obama’s supply-and-demand political decisions that indicate to me that the whole country is,basically,lost.
What a complete and utter tool Kmiec is. There’s lying, and then there’s this mess of garbage. What is Kmiec’s real game here? What is he really trying to accomplish?
Sean P. Dailey, Kmiec is trying to convince us that we are wrong. However, I think he is primarily trying to convince himself that he is right. Anyone with an ounce of rationality would be embarrassed by that column, but Kmiec just keeps going. It’s pretty sad.
I won’t be surprised at anything Obama says at Notre Dame. He will view his appearance there as a victory over the Church. Those of us who don’t fall into line will be marginalized.
I don’t particularly care. I am prepared to attend mass in basements and in homes. I will not accept the view that abortion is acceptable. I came to the Church late, and I am not letting people like Kmiec make me doubt the Truth. I stand with the Holy Father, with Our Lady, and with Jesus, who doesn’t appreciate pragmatic attitudes on abortion.
Here’s what Richard Allen, former Natl’ Security Advisor to President Reagan and ND grad x 2 has to say (April 11, 2009 Op Ed/NY Times):
“American presidents don’t go to commencements to engage in dialogue; they go to use the university platform to deliver a message, their message, not a two-way message. They fly in, speak, then fly back to Washington. Notre Dame provides a great photo op and seal of approval for any elected official.
What’s more, it’s important to remember that Notre Dame is a Catholic institution. The school openly flouts the guidelines of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops when it bestows an honorary degree upon a president who supports something anathema to the faith: abortion. Catholic doctrine holds that life begins at conception; as a candidate, Mr. Obama said that determining when life begins “is above my pay grade,” not an answer at all. There is every sign that his administration has a pro-abortion orientation.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/12/opinion/12allen.html
The comments of the various Obama apologists who call themselves Catholic lead one to conclude that they would have felt similar warmth and sympathy for another socialist for whom human life was of little value, that very popular leader of Germany from 1933 to 1945 (who also called himself Catholic at one time).
Dear Douglass
Please watch the following clips.
Clip 1 Start at 8:20 and watch until it ends. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IpIXzF-kKhs&feature=PlayList&p=08F04F4D68FD8153&index=16
Clip 2 Then watch the first 30 seconds
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8p-lcSpw0zw&feature=PlayList&p=08F04F4D68FD8153&index=17
Upon viewing sit and reflect for awhile. Good Luck
I dunno, but if I was in a bar fight with heretics or prots, or cafeteria catholics, I\’d be happy to have Father Z with me. He wouldn\’t be the one holding the coats, he\’d be in their swinging like Athanasius contra mundum.
tim
Father, I think your comments about Obama being dreamy are so funny. If you didn’t point things like that out then I would never have noticed how ridiculous some of these statements about Obama are, so I might be more easily persuaded by them.
I agree-all Fr. Z is doing is pointing out the utter absurdity of Doug Kmiec’s statements. His commentary brightnened my day, anyway. :) The ‘mantle of Catholicism’ nonsense is unbelievably ridiculous. There are no words to describe how twisted that “logic” is.
Virgil, people who keep visiting this blog come here for the personality that Fr. Z has invested it with which includes his musings about everything from food to Latin Translation. The blog itself is organic but if you don’t like his take on politics, ignore those posts like some people probably ignore the clerical haberdashery posts.
For what it’s worth, I thought Kmiec was simply referring to the commonality of the black and catholic experience in being targets of the KKK, in order to feed his larger point about why we as Catholics should support Obama. Not necessarily calling opponents racists.
This is rapidly becoming “a time for choosing” as Reagan called it. You may think that you can carve out a space for yourself where you and your religious beliefs will be left alone. Not if the state redefines its sphere of influence to include your health care (and that of your loved ones), private as well as public education and what you can hear on the radio and see on TV. I am not saying that this will happen but the fact that they are even on the table should give everyone food for thought.
My Great Grandfather had to guard the church property in the 1920s due to the KKK threat to kill the priest and torch the church buildings. This was a German immigrant farm community near Evansville, IN, the original beachhead for the KKK in Indiana. The KKK must’ve been busy, as there are a large number of German Catholic communities in and around Evansville and SW Indiana.
Speaking of the KKK, during the 20s, the KKK ran Indiana government, and was only kicked out because the Grand Dragon, D.C. Stephenson, who was convicted of rape, had corrupted the governor, and thought Gov. Jackson would pardon him. Jackson didn’t so Stephenson talked and brought down the whole mess.
So Kmiec says the most pro-death president ever is “pragmatic” on abortion and stem-cell research? We see how Kmiec gets more open about supporting evil the farther down the wide road the country goes. Obama is not the antichrist, but his policies would make any antichrist proud.
I know this is not central to the discussion, but Douglas Kmiec’s reference in this context to ‘St Paddy’s Day’ shows a certain lack of class.
Kmiec: “Jesus’ method was one of inclusion, teaching with generosity, forgiveness and truth — not snubbing those in high office.”
Holy Scripture: “And while He was being accused by the chief priests and elders, He answered nothing. Then Pilate said to Him, “Do You not hear how many things they testify against You?” But He answered him not one word, so that the governor marveled greatly.”
I think G. K. Chesterton said somewhere that the real battle in the future for the Catholic Church will not be between the Church and the world, but between bad Catholics and good Catholics. G.K. is right again!
Kmiec is 58 which means he grew up in the 60’s & 70’s. I know that this is a generalization but the strongest supporters for orthodox Catholicism in my parish comes from the young and the very old. There are a few orthodox Catholics from the 60’s & 70’s generation but they are the minority among that age group.
Bruce, you are so right
Im 25 years old and I go to the novus ordo for my weekday mass but travel to get to the traditional for my Sunday Mass and major feast days. I would go daily if I could. Perhaps as a boy it does stir my heart when one mentions of battles in the Church. This is one of those battles and I think that its vital for people to know firmly but in a pleasant not in your face way know where one stands on such issues. BO should not have been invited for an honour as he has dishounarable policies regarding human life.
It seems that policy on abortion is not a big deal for Kmiec.
Political effects of abortion: oh, those are bad.
Thomas’ comment seems OK to me: back in 1992, I knew otherwise sound Catholics who voted for Bill Clinton because they were personally desperate to get health care from the government.
“Wow Bad Catholics apparently are the greater enemy.
Comment by Noah Moerbeek — 14 April 2009 @ 12:06 pm ”
Exactly. Destroy from within, gain positions of power and “redefine” a wolf wearing sheep’s clothing to lead the sheep. I don’t see Kmiecs Catholicism. You can’t serve two masters and he has picked Marxist Obama.
The KKK marched on Notre Dame because it was a CATHOLIC university. Historically, the KKK
hated Catholics. (Just as some “Catholics” hate Catholics.) Only comparatively recently have they dropped that part of their twisted mission. It is disgusting to compare faithful Catholics who oppose honours to a pro-abortion politician to the KKK.
I, too, love Father Z’s tone in his fisks. It is unbelievable that freeborn Americans are
drooling like this over a man they elected and a man they could reject at the polls.
You simply do not see deference like this for elected officials in other Western nations.
Obama’s support of federal funding for human embryonic stem cell research reveals little serious thought and reflection.
http://catholicexchange.com/2009/03/24/116931/#hide
I have to seriously wonder whether Kmiec is trying to go into comedy with this latest piece.
Wow, Regina. I really don’t like the spirit I discern behind your words to FrZ.
Hey tim mccarthy-I like your ‘bar fight’ image! If I was in better physical shape, I’d jump into the fray with you and Fr. Z!
Or else I could stand by and exhort like St. Joan of Arc….
Tomas, actually Obama is the enemy of Wall Street, as evidenced by his desire to destroy our economy through socialism and his peristent demonization of investment banking (which is the definition of Wall Street) by using class warfare language in the vein of “Wall Street vs. Main Street.”
I’d like to see Dr. Kmiec address Obie’s statement that the vote he regretted the most in his political career–short as it has been–was that to attempt to save the life of Terri Schiavo. There is no middle ground for Obie. The unworthy shall die in Obie’s US. It is horrible that we have a president about whom I cannot qualify such a statement.
Wow, Regina,
I fear you nose might start bleeding up there so high are you on that horse. I am sure you don’t mean to be patronizing to our host, but….
Traitorous behavior, as many of read Kmeic, and Jenkins, rates that kind of push back and worse.
It is really not OK to say the man who supports infanticide, (IOW, this goes far beyond your typical “pro-choice” “its part of the party platform so what can I do” knd of advocacy) with the blockage of “born alive” acts and also partial birth abortion legislation, now bears the “mantle” of Catholicism. This makes most Catholics who know what the church teaches, or just people who know what is going on and have a sense of justice towards those who cannot defend themselves, want to puke. “Comedey” as someone just wrote, is right, as in sick joke. It is not OK to push your University to unsuspecting Catholic parents supporters as “Catholic” and “bearing the mantle of Catholicism” when you really are a “Yale” wannabe.
The approach of the POTUS regarding abortion rights is indeed “pragmatic” as stated by Mr. K., but not in the way this “apologist for the devil” intends (and devil is not OB). “Pragmatic” is Mr. Obama only in the most ruthless cold blooded calculation of who he needs in his cadre of supporters to advance his personal career. Mr. Kmeic must have the same bent, it appears more and more.
Fr Sean Coyle: “I know this is not central to the discussion, but Douglas Kmiec’s reference in this context to ‘St Paddy’s Day’ shows a certain lack of class.”
tsk tsk. How unspeakably terrible of the lower classes to refer to
Maewyn SuccatSt Patrick by such a name. Well I wouldn’t let my butler engage in such drollery. Why isn’t this lowbrow oink out standing round street corners selling matches or something more suited to his humble estate? It’s simply too awful. I will really have to complain to the bishop about this frightful insolence.anyone for a sherry?
Job 1:6
Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them.
How can he do this to himself, this Professor Kmiec? Kow-towing is bad enough (in Chinese, to kow-tow means to stike one’s head on the ground before an individual of high office/rank in the hopes of securing a favour) but simpering kow-towing? Ugh.
Thomas, did you read the latest news that adult stem cell research may have achieved a breakthrough with Type 1 diabetes?
I hope I speak for a majority of alumni (Class of ’77) when I proclaim pride in my Notre Dame for extending the invitation to President Obama to speak at commencement.
University president, Rev. John Jenkins, has emphasized that the invitation to Obama neither condones nor endorses his positions on specific issues regarding abortion and embryonic stem cell research. The invitation, instead, reinfores commitment to the mission of this distinguished Catholic university, to nurture intellectual pursuit and uninhibited debate. Are we to simply ban speakers with whom we disagree? We must fight the impulse to censor dissenting opinions.
Beyond that, the cynical, condescending tone of the postings by both “Fr Z”. and some responders does us all a disservice. It is the by-product of this intolerance that so many Catholics have sought refuge elsewhere. [A nice little whine. However, you didn’t address yourself in any substantive way to what I wrote. Pay more attention to what those who object have been saying. The problem is not whether Pres. Obama should ever do anything on the campus of a Catholic school. The problem arises when those schools give him special honors. This is not just any American President. This President is manifestly committed to things which are entirely contrary to the teachings of the Church and the natural law.]
Steve, where does it say that you must honor dissenting opinions? Should Hitler have been honored in the ’30’s at a Catholic university? Any racist proponent in the 50’s? Don’t confuse dissent on minor issues with the killing of innocent life.
Shane O’Neill: if you want to engage in sarcasm better get the basic terms right. The word is “oik” not “oink”. Fr. Coyle is right. Using “St Paddy’s day” in the context of a supposedly serious article IS disrespectful, certainly to this Irishman. It shows the man (Mr. K), who is obviously not Irish, trying to be “one of the lads” by throwing in a faux folksy reference… and falling on his face. It says a lot about the man’s judgement, although the disgraceful and confused article itself speaks volumes more.
Ever heard an Englishman referring to “St. Georgie’s day”?
Beyond that, the cynical, condescending tone of the postings by both “Fr Z”. and some responders does us all a disservice. It is the by-product of this intolerance that so many Catholics have sought refuge elsewhere.
What is cynical is the disregard for the murderous regime that this President condones and enthusiastically promotes in exchange for “honor” and “pride”.
Mark Sea on his blog said it best
“Speaking of Richard Rich….”
Steve,
If your once-Catholic university were to invite mr obama to come and debate Archbishop Bruskewitz on abortion, contraception, euthanasia, or homosexual marriage, or take part in a panel discussion with Catholics like him, then your remarks might obtain – maybe.
Of course, justifying even that would mean said institute of “higher” learning would have likewise once invited Idi Amin to discuss Uganda’s contribution to advanced methods of population control, just “to nurture intellectual pursuit and uninhibited debate.”
I can just imagine how many Nazi-sympathizing Americans would have been put off by such cynical attempts to censor their dissenting opinions about the care and feeding of our mid-20th century minority populations, given the success of Herr Himmler’s contemporaneous programs designed to foster a better life for European Jews. After all, don’t we have a heritage of open inquiry we must maintain at all costs?
There is zero objective obligation to invite a murderous president to speak on a subject of his choosing, while no one is in a position to respond to whatever he chooses to say – especially the victims of his long-supported pro-death policies.
Please stop defrauding your fellow Catholics. You wouldn’t invite a Hitler or Stalin to speak at any campus – or would you, now – for the sake of not stifling dissent?
Your arguments suggest the problems at Notre Shame didn’t originate so recently. Of course, you probably graduated under Fr. Hesbaugh’s regime (or darned close), so there we have it.
Steve,
Are you on “Fr. Jenkins'” payroll to root out and denounce all the nasty people on the net who think your college blew it in a big way? Or is this your own personal mission? Clearly one or the other, since your offended reaction ( I am shocked! Shocked! “Fr. Z” you meanie!) implies to me that you are not a regular at WDTPRS.
And Shane O’Neill
Your attack of a man of the cloth is, well, disgraceful. Welcome to the gutter.
Apologies for a detour off topic:
Rose, I have seen the announcement from Brazil. I pray our Lord will provide us a cure through moral means. Thanks and God bless.
Wow–
Did I read correctly (from Phil’s response and at least one other) that you put Hitler, Stalin, Idi Amin and Barack Obama into the same category? You don’t find that to be just a tiny bit of a stretch?
I’m also curious why there was no firestorm of controversey when ND invited President George W Bush to speak back in 2001. He had been the Governor of Texas where he not only upheld the death penalty but promoted it? Where was Right to Life then..or now for that matter? Is life sacred or not? Is adult life somehow less sacred? Please explain. I guess I get impatient with such selective outrage.
Steve
You written you graduated from ND. From what I can deduce, you’ve got a case against them for fraudelent conveyance, ’cause they certainly didn’t educate you.
Just got around to reading the comments under my post. If I read this blog correctly, the bold red text represents a response (“nice little whine”) from Father John Zuhsldorf. You are really a condescending guy, Father. I can’t imagine that style provides much comfort to anyone to whom you minister. It causes me to wonder if your cynicism is a product of too much time on the intellectual pulpit and not enough time getting dirt under your nails with real people.
Tertullian– Your comments are glib– but they don’t answer my questions.
Steve,your response makes my case: you claim to have graduated from ND but fecklessly drag Bush in to support your argument in the face of the fact that Pope Benedict has written cogently on the false comparison of support for abortion to the use of capital punishment & the choice of going to war.
The comparison between abortion and capital punishment is “false” simply because Pope Benedict says it is? That’s it? No questions or analysis necessary– end of discussion. That seems pretty simplistic to me.
Pope Benedict has written
“While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia.”
Pray tell, what has Steve the Theologian written?
The equation of abortion and capital punishment is false by definition. Compare the victims of the two. Capital punishment can be warranted as a defense against a dangerous aggressor who threatens the lives of others. There is no such warrant for killing the most innocent and helpless of persons.
Steve, the comparison between abortion and capital punishment is not only false, but dishonest. According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
Pope JPII added his opinion that these days it is usually not justifiable, but did not forbid it. He could have forbidden it to Catholics, but he could not have (as all the media said he had) declared immoral what a couple of years before had been declared in the same Catechism to be permissible.
Note that the two arguments against the death penalty are that it could be applied to an innocent person or that it could deprive a guilty person of a chance to repent. The opposite of both conditions, which would make capital punishment permissible, are never applicable to abortion.
another indication of the falseness of comparison between Abortion and Capital Punishment, is the disparity in the numbers involved. I don’t want to be accused of a Kmiec-like infatuation with numbers but how many 10s of convicted criminals are executed in the US each year versus how many hundreds of thousands of innocents though abortion?
“For example, when Obama suspended George W. Bush’s hastily drafted eleventh-hour conscience clause regulations, the word went out that this was the end of Catholic hospitals. Not so, but to make the point, the Obama team needed to highlight well-established federal and state laws that already permit medical personnel with moral and religious objection to refrain from abortion practice”
Nonsense on stilts. Forcing people against their conscience, or forcing them out IS on the progressivist agenda. Evidece: http://www.whatswrongwiththeworld.net/2009/04/nobody_is_proabortion.html Pertinent quote regarding conscience objectors:
“If your conscience forbids you to carry arms, don’t join the military or become a police officer. If you have qualms about animal experimentation, think hard before choosing to go into medical research. And, if you’re not prepared to provide the full range of reproductive health care (or prescriptions) to any woman who needs it then don’t go into obstetrics and gynecology, or internal or emergency medicine, or pharmacology. Choose another field! We’ll respect your consciences when you begin to take responsibility for them.”
Judging from the paranthetical comments, such as the criticism of Obama’s overseas trip, it is apparent that the opposition to Obama is based on issues unrelated to abortion and the right to life. Kmiec has always been pro-life and has always been against abortion. His support for Obama is despite these believes. The far right wing nuts are using abortion as a wedge issue. The Republican leadership gives lip service to the right for life, but has not criminalized abortion. The Republicans have done many things that make them unfit to serve. Making abortion the one issue litmus test is unreasonable. It is bizarre that the true right to life supporters would so harshly criticize one of their own, just because that right to life person supports a candidate that is contra to his views on one issue. It appears they are using that issue to cloud their real purpose.