Skip Navigation Links
Home
Donate
Free News via Email
Subscribe for a Friend
Send News Tip
Contact Us
Search
About Us
Is California Catholic Daily important to you?
You can help keep us online!
Advertise with us
Currently more than 150,000 visitors read CalCatholic.com
Churches Worth Driving To

* Submit Your Church *

News from the Trenches
I Couldn’t Do It...
Notes from a
Cultural Madhouse
The End...
Theology. Learn it, live it.
Speech Police! Destruction of language.
St. Joseph. Getting to know him.
CLASSIFIED ADS
San Jose & SF Bay Area - Catholic Funeral and Cemetery Preplanning: Reasonable costs and pay...(read more)
For Sale, burial plot, San Jose: Rare, very exclusive double internment burial plot. Fo...(read more)
Federal Nursing Home Reform Act: A summary of long term care laws regarding the aged and inf...(read more)
See All Classified Ads
Submit Classified Ad
CALENDAR
Covina - A Catholic Men's Conference - from Boys to Men: Presented by St. Joseph Commun...(read more)
Yorba Linda - 16th Annual Mary’s Shelter Golf Tournament: Wedn., Sept. 15, Black G...(read more)
Big Bear - Sacred Heart Retreat Camp Family Work Weekend: Fri., Sept. 3 - Sun.read more)
See All Calendar Items
Submit Calendar Item
LATEST FEEDBACK
Local Martyr I don't know about all of you, but I usually don't wear a dr... [RR - 9/2/2010 4:38:02 PM]
Anti-Catholicism of another era? Yes, Mother Mary has a special love for Muslims, as She does... [C.B. - 9/2/2010 3:48:11 PM]
How to Avoid Witchcraft or X-rated Films for Your Kids Dennis B: you wrote that if parents could afford Catholic sc... [Sawyer - 9/2/2010 3:34:56 PM]
Don Bosco relics to stop in San Francisco JLS, actually I try to stay away from political discussions ... [Mark from PA - 9/2/2010 3:29:37 PM]
“Clearly at odds with fundamental Catholic teachings” Some people idolize professors!! Yuck!!!... [Ski Ven - 9/2/2010 3:15:02 PM]

Links to Other Sites
Prior Site Archives
Article Archives

“Too single-issue to pick wisely?”

Catholic law professor who endorsed Obama invited to speak at St. John’s Seminary


Douglas Kmiec, the Catholic law professor at Pepperdine University whose March endorsement of Barack Obama stunned conservatives, has been invited to give an election post-mortem at St. John’s Seminary in Camarillo.

Kmiec will give the 13th annual Newman C. Eberhardt Lecture on Nov. 11 at 7:15 p.m. in Prayer Hall on the seminary grounds. The title of the lecture is “Catholics and the 2008 Election: Are We a House Divided?” The lecture series is named in honor of Vincentian Fr. Newman C. Eberhardt, who taught church history at the seminary from 1941 until his death in 1995. Admission is free and reservations are not required.

According to an announcement on the seminary’s web site, Kmiec’s lecture “will be an examination of the prominent role played by the American Catholic community in the 2008 election, from Bishops educating candidates on ensoulment to alternative ways to be pro-life to the selection of running mates.” In addition, said the announcement, Kmiec will discuss “Were Catholics too single-issue to pick wisely on the full social Gospel of the Church?”

Before taking his current post as a professor of constitutional law at Pepperdine, Kmiec served as legal counsel for presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, dean of the law school at the Catholic University of America, as a law professor at Notre Dame University.

“No doubt some of my friends will see this as a matter of party or intellectual treachery,” wrote Kmiec, a self-described Republican, in his March 23 Obama endorsement published in Slate magazine. In the article, Kmiec said he favored the preservation of traditional marriage and believed that life begins at conception, but that he favored Obama because the Illinois senator “wants to move the nation beyond its religious and racial divides and that he wants to return the United States to that company of nations committed to human rights.”

Most recently, writing for the National Catholic Reporter, Kmiec took on Denver Archbishop Charles J. Chaput, who publicly called Obama the most pro-abortion presidential candidate in 35 years. (See “Kmiec vs. Chaput,” California Catholic Daily, Nov. 4, 2008.) Kmiec said the disagreement between himself and Archbishop Chaput is not over the “essence of Church instruction,” that is, “the promotion of human life,” but over “the preferred means of implementing it.” Kmiec said the archbishop argues for “the necessity of promoting life through law,” which primarily means working to reverse Roe v. Wade and “discounts reducing the incidence of abortion by cultural (economic and social) means.”

The endorsement of Obama led a priest to deny Kmiec communion at a Mass for the Ventura/LA North chapter of Legatus in April. The incident made it onto the pages of the Washington Post, where columnist E.J. Dionne wrote, “Word spread like wildfire in Catholic circles: Douglas Kmiec, a staunch Republican, firm foe of abortion and veteran of the Reagan Justice Department, had been denied Communion. His sin? Kmiec, a Catholic who can cite papal pronouncements with the facility of a theological scholar, shocked old friends and adversaries alike earlier this year by endorsing Barack Obama for president. For at least one priest, Kmiec's support for a pro-choice politician made him a willing participant in a grave moral evil.”


READER COMMENTS

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 12:26 AM By Shawna
I'm crying tears of joy tonight that God has graced our wonderful country with a man so capable of bringing our country together as one, and the world together as one. God bless America, my home sweet home. Maybe Dr. Kmiec will be able to say somethnig in his lecture 2 the seminarians how to think correctly about interpreting church documents, that the seperation of church and state means that we cannot empose our faith on others but still we can work together to build bridges of tolerance, unity and peace and justice for the poor and the immigrant. President Obama! What an angle has been sent to us from above! Dr. Kmeic was the first major catholic intelectual to show Obama's real promotion of the catholic social teaching over the mean, hate-filled rich republicans who only fix on 1 issue, and I bet God has a special prize in mind for Dr. Kmiec. hmm... justice Kmeic?

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 1:13 AM By John F. Maguire
As was fitting, Legatus apologized to Professor Kmiec for the mistake made by the priest who wrongly denied Kmiec communion. I say "wrongly" advisedly. As Douglas Kmiec, for his own part, has noted, "The Catholic difficulty stems not from having to avoid casting a ballot with the intent of not promoting or encouraging abortion--for, honestly now, who does that?--but having one's vote proclaimed cooperation with sin or evil without what the Church calls 'proportionate' reasons." Remote material cooperation in evil--here the evil of voting for an abortocratic candidate--can be permissible, as Cardinal Ratzinger points out, where there are proportionate reasons motivating that vote. In this connection, see my posts at CCD November 4: 10:58 AM and 2:13 PM (arguing why conscientious voters for Senator McCain must necessarily have been in the presence of proportionate reasons for voting for Senator McCain, just as conscientious voters for Senator Obama must necessarily have been in the presence of proportionate reasons for voting for Senator Obama).

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 2:36 AM By Mary
There is only one Truth. We must be vigilant and not yield to compromise in upholding it.

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 3:54 AM By BJ
A vote for a pro abortion politician is not far removed from actually taking the syringe and doing the 'termination' yourself. You have empowered the process and been instrumental in the follow up deaths. God help us all.

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 4:37 AM By Fr. M.P.
Kmiec says "[Obama] wants to return the United States to that company of nations committed to human rights.” Really? I guess Kmiec is blind and deaf since Obama wants to continue to refuse any rights to an unborn or even newborn (abortion surviving) child. And what human rights is the nation not committed to? I can just imagine what will be proposed...

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 4:58 AM By David
Blood is on his hands. Without a proportionate reason, he took part in material cooperation with evil.

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 5:01 AM By Eileen
St. John's Seminary also produced Cardinal Mahony who helped select like-minded Western Bishops and priests who covered up the sex abuse scandals and who also voted for Obama. Doug Kmiec's invitation to even step foot on St. John's Seminary grounds is just another pattern of evidence showing that the dominoes are still falling down and destroying the True Faith and everything else in their path. I am so sorry St. John, they have disgraced your name. The real name of this Seminary should be the "Thirty Pieces of Silver Seminary."

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 5:34 AM By Annie
What an abomination. To invite a renegade Catholic (is he still Catholic?) to give the Newman Eberhardt lecture is an insult to Fr. Eberhardt, one of the most orthodox priests, a very saintly man who would not take credit for his brilliant teaching, his saintly example, and would say "Give God the Glory," He spent 50 years forming priests for the archdiocese of Los Angeles and later Orange. He taught several classes of permanent deacons, a great blessing for everyone, because they were given the beautiful and eternal truths of the Faith, and most importantly, the example of a priest who lived his vocation, his life for the Lord and for his neighbors.

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 6:11 AM By Margie
Why not invite Father Frank Pavonne to speak to the seminarians? At least we could be assured that they would be hearing words faithful to the Holy Catholic Church? What can seminarians learn from Kmiec that they could not have learned by studying Judas, who betrayed Christ?

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 6:47 AM By JLS
Amazing how intelligent and educated a man can be and still deny his faith. Kmiec is the opposite of St Thomas More.

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 7:02 AM By Ken M.
St. John's Seminary has received its last contribution from me. Kmiec is running after a Supreme Court nomination. He will need the suppport of Cardinal Mahony to make it happen. Interesting.

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 7:34 AM By Daniel
It is going to be difficult to support a Seminarian we have at this facility any longer. Liberalism is what got our Catholic Church in so much trouble in the first place, now that the dust is settling over the homosexual fiasco of the recent past do our good Bishops think that they are going to get away with more of the same old crap. I think not. This creep is a heratic, plain and simple, he supports a man and a party that take joy at the genocide of Gods children, and now a Bishop or Cardinal has the audacity to have him speak to young Seminarians. Bring in Fathers Corapi or Father Casey of the Fathers of Mercy, or are they not liberals, are they shunned in favor of the heretic????

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 7:41 AM By Otto
It is amazing how far away "Catholic" educational institutions have gone to appease and promote the "secular" tendencies in our religious faith. And coyly many of our religious leaders are standing on the side lines without exercising their duty: to catechize the faithful according to the true and authentic Church And the faithful themselves find it much more 'comfortable' and convenient to follow the direction of the secular media, than the tenets of the authentic Catholic Church (yes, Rome). So, there is the connect. However, we are not electing a religious entity, but live in a secular society, - and yet we are charged with acting out our faith, no matter how inconvenient that may be. I am afraid the consequences of not to doing our duty as commanded will be worse, than giving up "conveniences".

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 8:18 AM By Maria C
I am thankful for this priest who denied communion to Kmiec. We have alot of Judas's in our church who call themselfes Catholic and are pro-baby killing. We are not alone, our protestant brothers and sisters have the same problem, they have many lukewarm people who also embrace pro-choice views. We are not alone, our Church is not the only one suffering of these types of sins.

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 8:44 AM By Anne T.
Judas speaks!

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 9:30 AM By James
Pray for the leaders at St. John's (they need it). More importantly pray for the men there studying to be priests. Most of these semenarians are good, holy men who desire to follow the true teachuings of the Church. It is neither their desire nor intention to have this heretic come and speak. It is soley the decision of the leaders of the seminary that this is happening. The seminarians are required to attend.

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 9:37 AM By george
Looks like ole Doug just craves attention. I wonder if he and Richard McBrian paled around when Doug was a prof at Notre Dame. While his highly regarded legal mind allows him to twist facts to suit his purposes, his arguments here fail to pass an old ethical smell test. The boy seems to think that there is proportionality between human acts when one is intrinsically evil or he has a creative definition of intrinsic evil or he denies that there is such evil. If Obama doesn't see the merit of satisfying Doug's craving by bringing him back to Washington, maybe he could join the faculty at St Johns in some ad hoc capacity like reading St Thomas in the refectory during an evening meal, say on Friday nights... to reduce any conflicts with his other professorial activity.

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 9:51 AM By Puttss
Those who voted twice for a guy with a 1.5 GPA who loved playing with his war toys and couldn't speak English also were participants in grave moral evil. Jack Kennedy dared us to go to the moon in ten years. Obama is daring us to put our country back together in four years. Going to the moon was a technicality. Putting our country back together is a spiritual challenge that transcends the single issue of abortion. It includes our fight against it. Let's get with it. with God's help we can do it.

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 10:01 AM By pete salveinini
Kmiec thinks like a lawyer. His overall point is not wrong, and he should not have been denied communion. He just fails to discern the actual End Times we have entered and that is a lack of spiritual intuition that would have concurred with Archbishop Chaput. His understanding of Obama is correct on two points: a presidential temperament and a pleasant personality; but as to his CHARACTER it is overly cautious and quite unrevealing of his real intentions; finally, he is dead wrong on life and marriage issues which will determine our decline if actually followed.

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 10:14 AM By Anne T.
Puttss, nothing will save this nation. I repeat nothing will save this nation as long as we are aborting millions of children each day, and Obama would not even vote to help children who were still alive from botched abortions. This nation has become the pagan Roman Empire all over again.

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 10:46 AM By J H
THE DAY AFTER--The people have spoken-----the people who were duped by the likes of Obama and his cronies, The losers are: Life, Christianity, the Supreme Court, the Catholic church,. and the winners are: the road to Socialism, homosexuals and lesbians, and liberals. What is surprising is that Catholic New England was so much against Life. Winners were also the young, the immigrants, etc. who were influenced by ACORN. The winner was Satan, the devil himself. It may be that God allowed this to happen.. Worst part of it is that we must wait another 4 years to reverse the evil that has been done.

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 10:59 AM By Dan
"I'm crying tears of joy tonight that God has graced our wonderful country with a man so capable of bringing our country together as one, and the world together as one." My goodness Shawna, I thought Jesus Christ was the Savior. True, there have been those calling Obama the Messiah. Perhaps you count yourself among those. I wonder, though, if Kmiec has moved leftward enough to warrant consideration for the Supreme Court. Obama said in the debates that he wants justices like Ruth Bader Ginsburg, not Thomas or Scalia. If Obama sticks to this, Kmiec will have to join you in viewing all of us pro-lifers as " mean, hate-filled rich republicans who only fix on 1 issue." By then one wonders-- will he have any desire to call himself Catholic any longer?

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 11:07 AM By Mary Ann Kreitzer
There is a judgment day as Bishop Hermann wrote in his diocesan paper and Douglas Kmiec will face it. So will those at St. John's Seminary who are honoring a man who engaged in direct cooperation with the most horrendous evil of our time. There is no proportionate reason that could excuse advocating the deliberate infanticide of babies born alive after failed abortions. That Catholics were a major swing vote in electing Obama is a tragedy to be mourned, not a victory to be celebrated. I will pray for Kmiec and his cronies. They have much for which to answer. There will be no little voices calling for mercy on them when they stand before Jesus Christ, the Lord of Life.

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 11:10 AM By A
P.S. to my last post. I have my doubts that McCain would have done much either. He couldn't because of all the pro-aborts in his party. The reason pro-abortionist hate Palin and Gianna Jessen (the abortion survivor) is because of their guilt. The two women prick the conscience of those pushing abortion, and evil hates when the light is shined upon it. They can't stand the light of Truth.

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 11:15 AM By Anne T.
And if they think the glare from that light is bad now, just wait until they stand before the judgment seat of God.

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 11:18 AM By Ron
Shawna, I will also be willing to bet that God has a very special prize for Kmiec and his ilk - a very warm one!!!

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 11:28 AM By Sick and Tired
I'll go you a couple further, Father MP - and I hope the starstruck Shawna is listening: By his own statements, Obama will not cut spending, he will grow government and increase its intrusiveness, his foreign policy is no different than that of Bush, and the bailouts will continue, collapsing the dollar and throwing more power and control to the global central bankers. So much for liberty, sovereignty and freedom. He claims "Change" but when you read the fine print, you see any actual change contained within it is for the worse.

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 11:49 AM By Cyrus Johnson
The "Professor Douglas Kmiec Publicity Tour" picks up pace with newly announced tour dates. Coming soon to a city near you. P.T. Barnum would be proud, or maybe PZ Myers?

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 12:05 PM By Pax Christi
The jubilant victors may want to break out the millstones, put them around their necks and cast themselves into the sea if they wish to heed Jesus' advice that it would be better to do that than to harm the least among us.

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 12:18 PM By Dr. Mugridge
"The fruit of abortion is nuclear holocaust" - the words of Mother Teresa to the national prayer breakfast in Washington, DC 1997.

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 12:34 PM By ssoldie
what is it that some seminarians and lay people have said about, 'distroying the Church from within', I understand that this man was at Stuebenville, teaching? What?

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 1:09 PM By Dan
What this lecture appearance does is show a great rift in the Amercian hierarchy. On Tuesday we view on CalCatholic the conflict between Kmiec and Chaput; on Wednesday we see Mahoney shmoozing with Kmiec. The aspect of his lecture on single-issue politics reminds me of Shawna's orginal post. From the sound of it, pro-life Catholics of Chaput's mind-set would appear to Kmiec to be foolish (at least, let us hope, they are not in Kmiec's view "mean, hate-filled rich republicans who only fix on 1 issue.").

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 1:20 PM By Rachel
I think it's a little strange to pick on Obama, as if Obama = sin and McCain = grace. C'mon, we all know McCain is a "practical pro-lifer" - i.e., not genuine at all. Someone really ought to have been denied communion for supporting McCain too.

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 1:54 PM By Sister Act
In reply to Ken M.: Every law professor worth his salt would love to sit as one of the nine Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court, though the psychic economy of law professors precludes their dwelling on the possibility. From the point of view of Constitutional law, Professor Kmiec has a salt-of-the-earth (common law) position on abortion that would commend him for just such a position. Even in this highly speculative context, why would you begrudge Douglas Kmiec due consideration as a potential Supreme Court Justice?

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 1:58 PM By Victoria G.
St. John's Seminary? Why Not? Isn't that the place that has always had the reputation that, "Anything Goes"?

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 2:11 PM By Damaris Teague
Strange, at an emotional level, how a Catholic, pro-life law professor gets cast as scapegoat--at least on this website--for the electoral victory of Senator Barack Obama.

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 2:51 PM By Eileen
Shawna,You should never cry tears of joy when you are being deceived about Obama or Doug Kmiec. Webster's Dictionary definition of the word angle: "A Tricky Method For Achieving A Purpose." Since Satan is the chief purveyor of deceptive angles, you might want to reflect on why you wrote the word angle. Did you mean to write that Obama was an angel sent from heaven or we're you given a second of grace to see "The Light?" Heaven never sends deception Shawna. Has anyone ever taken the time to explain to you that the devil must first deceive someone before he destroys them? When it comes to describing Obama, the word angle is very appropriate though.

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 3:43 PM By John F. Maguire
In reply to BJ: Your claim that a vote for an abortocratic politician is "not far removed from taking the syringe and doing the 'termination' itself'" runs contrary to Cardinal Ratzinger's letter to Cardinal McCarrick. This letter distinguishes between proximate material cooperation in evil and remote material cooperation in evil. It finds the latter permissible where there are proportionate reasons to vote for a particular candidate who nonethless remains an abortocrat. The positions of Senator Obama and Senator McCain, however, are--such are the times within which we life--both abortocratic, though in different ways. Minimally, most Catholics had a rough understanding of that fact in yesterday's vote--and voted their best judgment. In this connection, it is bizarre that CCD should attract bloggers who seem not to understand the import of Cardinal Ratzinger's letter to Cardinal McCarrick, let alone the clarificatory concept of remote material cooperation and the conditional permissibility of such cooperation.

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 3:58 PM By Sick and Tired
Good post, Eileen. I'm pretty sure that when the Mesiah comes, he won't have a D or an R behind his name. Hey Shawna, are you astute enough to know who Zbigniew Brezinski is? Know his affiliation with Obama? Know his position not only on abortion but on eugenics? Do you even know what eugenics is? Are you aware that he has written that it is his wish, along with Kissinger and other elites to eliminate the world's "useless eaters?" Chew on that while you cry for your new "savior."

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 4:27 PM By garvan
FYI, the so-called "proportionate" reason for voting for a pro-abort applies only when BOTH candidates are pro-aborts, but one is better on other life issues than is his opponent. Thus, there was no valid "proportionate" reason one could vote for Obama over McCain. That said, Benedict needs to revisit this issue, because a pro-abortion politician is ipso facto disqualified from receiving the vote of any serious Christian.

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 4:36 PM By Sister Act
The abortion rate per day in the United States is high but no excuse for you, Anne T., to maim the truth by claiming that "we [in this nation] are aborting millions of children each day."

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 4:36 PM By MAJRDAD
Read Alan Keyes' editorial column of 11/4/08 entitled "How Christian voters have denied their faith" - impressive as all his writings are. Insightfully, logically and biblically he disassembles the concept that it's acceptable for a Catholic to vote for the lesser of two evils - in this instance John McCain. Just hours before voting I was prepared to do just that - hold my nose and vote for the lesser of two evils. And although Alan was on the ballot as a third-party candidate, he never came out in his artucle and said "you should vote for me because I'm a real Catholic and totally support the holy principles of the Church" but I knew from past experience that he has been and is a 100%er - the real Catholic deal. So, you may say that I wasted my vote but I don't think so because in the long run I felt that a vote for Alan Keyes rather than the lesser of two evils demonstrated my continued dedication to the tenets of our Holy Faith - if only to myself. I sincerely hope and pray that more people will do some sincere soul-searching and realize that when you vote for the lesser of two evils, some degree of evil is still what you'll get in the end.

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 5:54 PM By JLS
Comrade Maguire, Kmiec has no position for an apologist. You're stacking his nebulous ideological position up against One Hundred Bishops who say he is abjectly wrong in a grave sinful way. Jesus does not redeem the world by becoming worldly ... it just is not the way God wills it. There are saints who have demonstrated God's will, and Kmiec has done the opposite. To persist in likening Kmiec to someone who is doing the work of the Church is a mockery of God. You'll pay the price.

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 9:13 PM By John F. Maguire
In reply to JLS and Garvan: To date, I've defended the position of Douglas Kmiec (1) on his reading of Cardinal Ratzinger's 2004 letter, which I think is correct (compare, however, Archbishop Chaput's divergent reading of that letter), (2) on Kmiec's insight that a return of the abortion question to the state legislatures to decide the status of pre-born infants without, however, any reference to the always already relevant status of pre-born infants as "persons" under common law, constitutes, in effect, an embracement of the very premise of _Roe v. Wade_, namely, that a pre-born infant is not a "person" under Constitutional and common law (let's call (2) the McCain-Palin error), and (3) on Cardinal Ratzinger's decision to leave proportionality analysis (as to which of two abortocratic candidates to vote for) to the voters themselves. On (3), Garvan, you are straightforward. You don't like Cardinal Ratzinger's letter in the first place, so you advise Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, to "revsit this issue." By contrast, JLS, instead of addressing points (1), (2) or (3), you play games, as it were, inside the polemical Imaginary--I mean, for example, by calling persons you disagree with as "comrades"--shades of Lenin, shades of Mao. Speaking of the latter, JLS, you would have 100 flowers bloom--I mean, your 100 American bishops and their statements. But these statements, on the whole, discuss neither (1), nor (2), nor (3). They range from sound interventions against Congresswoman Pelosi as a self-contractictory Catholic to sound discussions of voting ethics; but not the points at issue here. But JLS, no, God is no more mocked by Professor Kmiec's having raised points (1), (2), and (3) than (I pray) by my having studied these points--although I have yet to read Doug Kmiec's book on the voting question. Until I do, I will fight shy of your calling me an "apologist"--OK?

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 11:10 PM By Anne T.
Marjrdad, I do not think you wasted your vote. Good for you. I am sorry that I did not help Alan Keyes when he was running against Obama in Illinois, but I was not giving money to any politicians at that time. I was giving to the American Life League, crisis pregnancies centers, other Catholic organizations and a children's home at that time. There are so many good causes that it is impossible to give to them all. But I do have regrets about not helping Keyes. He is a good man.

Posted Wednesday, November 05, 2008 11:26 PM By Mike
"I'm crying tears of joy tonight that God has graced our wonderful country with a man so capable of bringing our country together as one, and the world together as one." huh? Specifically, what are you using to make this assessment? Your statement flies in the face of his campaign promises and his legislative history. There is nothing unifying about him except his ability to make people feel good - that's it. I cry tears of sorrow that there are people like you who value form over substance and don't even realize the extent of their ignorance and the harm it does. You have my pity and my prayers.

Posted Thursday, November 06, 2008 5:49 AM By T.G.
I'm happy to see the Pro Life Catholic posters standing up to Kmiec, other obvious Obama supporters who seek to rationalize their vote, and St John's Seminary....here in the Midwest (Iowa) we have at least two Catholic Universities that regularly honor pro abortion politicians / public figures. It is unbelieveable how far our world has fallen in terms of lack of values, morals, and common sense. May God have Mercy on all of us.

Posted Thursday, November 06, 2008 7:02 AM By Dai Yoshida
Rachel: Emperor Constantine was a "practical Christian" Not genuine at all. Perhaps Christians shouldn't have supported him and chose to be killed off by the thousands by the other guy.

Posted Thursday, November 06, 2008 8:07 AM By Dave N.
Given their past performance, it should be blatantly obvious that some serious reform is needed at St. John's and many other seminaries. We are providing only a marginal education (at best) for our priests—an insult to the seminarians and their commitment to serve the church. As we have seen these same priests eventually become bishops who STILL don't know anything and only create further havoc and end up costing our church billions of dollars and probably millions of souls. For example (and I could be wrong here) I don't think Abp. Chaput even has a divinity degree--which is why someone like Kmiec (a lawyer) can argue circles around him. We've lost sight of the reforms of Trent. Why is the bar set so low?

Posted Thursday, November 06, 2008 9:42 AM By John D
Cardinal Ratzinger, in a memorandum titled "Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion- General Principles," stated clearly” "The minister of Holy Communion must refuse to distribute it" when warning and counsel given to the manifest sinner "have not had their effect."

Posted Thursday, November 06, 2008 12:20 PM By More
Why Professor Kmiec, it is one thing to sell your soul for the whole world...but for Obama?

Posted Thursday, November 06, 2008 1:06 PM By Anne T.
Yes, Sister Act my figures were high for just the United States. According to the National Right to Life, there has been about 3803.52 children killed per day since 1973, but one child killed is one too many. Also, because of our policies towards other nations during the administrations of pro-abortion Presidents, we have contributed to a lot more than that.

Posted Thursday, November 06, 2008 2:40 PM By lsjk
Shawna, you just called me mean, rich and hateful! I'm astonished at this type of alienating talk from someone who just mentioned how we need unity in our nation. Looks like you're creating more division than anything else with your words...I wonder if King Obama would approve.

Posted Thursday, November 06, 2008 2:42 PM By lsjk
Shawna, you just called me mean, rich and hateful! I'm astonished at this type of alienating talk from someone who just mentioned how we need unity in our nation. Looks like you're creating more division than anything else with your words...I wonder if King Obama would approve.

Posted Thursday, November 06, 2008 3:52 PM By Angie
Well, there are many terrible mortal sins committed by the clergy and hierarchy for which they too should be denied Holy Communion.

Posted Thursday, November 06, 2008 3:59 PM By R. J. Keyes
In reply to John D.: In his adherence to Cardinal Ratzinger's voting-instruction letter to Cardinal McCarrick, Douglas Kmiec can hardly be regarded as having committed a sin, let alone an obstinate sin, that would warrant ministerial refusal of Holy Communion. This same consideration is presumptively true in regard to all Catholic voters--all of whom, unless they voted for Alan Keyes (a throwaway vote), voted for a candidate far removed from justice, which here calls for the inclusion of pre-born infants within the protection of the law as juridical persons in full possession of the right to life.

Posted Thursday, November 06, 2008 8:20 PM By JLS
No, Maguire, you're playing the games here. I've addressed every point you've made in one or another post. It's that you continue to remake the same defeated points. The only new one you've forwarded is the one on the Pope's letter to the Cardinal, which you presume to adopt as your own. The One Hundred Bishops have addressed it, with true authority, whereas you're contending against them with no authority as to what the letter means. You've done this by manufacturing a suitable context. This is why such a great number of Bishops have spoken up in unison, because of the subtle deception and misguided argument of a number of important people. I have found the core of your penchant for this level of error, and will bring it forth in time. On the technical level, your argument is not being precisely dealt with by the bishops for the same reason that Jesus Christ does not indulge the pharisees out to trap Him by justifying their contexts ... to do so would be to play in their fantasies. Instead He does what the bishops do, and points out the truth. The pharisees ever tried to use parts of it to trap Him, and always failed. The pharisees never engaged Jesus in His own terms, thus denying their own souls' the truth. They preferred to settle for a lie than to humble themselves before God.

Posted Thursday, November 06, 2008 8:55 PM By cjo
After reading all the above comments that 'are all over the ballpark' is there any doubt that the Church is in a sad state when there is obfuscation about killing un-born and born babies ?? And the final straw is for a "Catholic" professor who rationalizes voting pro abortion/killing to be the guest speaker at Cardinal Mahony's seminary. I"M SURE FATHER PAVONE IS A "PERSONA NO GRATA" AT ST. JOHN'S !!! Where does one find the true Faith these days ???

Posted Saturday, November 08, 2008 10:56 PM By John F. Maguire
In reply to cjo: My objection here, cjo, would be to your putting quotes around the word *Catholic* in your reference to Douglas Kmiec, a professor of the Constitutional law at the University of Pepperdine. There are no grounds for doing so, anymore than there are grounds for doing so in reference to any Catholic voter who voted for Senator Obama--except those voters who voted for Senator Obama (or for Senator McCain, for that matter) *because* the candidate in question is an abortocrat (defined as a candidate who refuses to cognize pre-born infants as "persons" under the law.). In this connection, it is important not to confound (a) the presence of proportional reasons for voting for an abortocratic candidate (the presence of such reasons, as Cardinal Ratzinger has made clear, renders a vote for an abortocratic candidate "remote" material cooperation in the evil of abortion, and therefore "permissible") with (b) the "rationalization" of abortion (which "rationalization" is always impermissible because all deliberate (direct) killing of pre-born infants is always impermissible). Given the ontological character and God-given dignity of pre-born infants, any "rationalization" of abortion, then, is contrary to right reason and, in consequence, an *offensum Dei*--a sin against God.

Posted Sunday, November 09, 2008 9:19 PM By JLS
There are no grounds for not putting quotes around Kmiec's "Catholic" appelation.

Posted Monday, November 10, 2008 11:14 PM By Kenneth M. Fisher
Angie, I guess you don't know your claimed Faith very well. It just so happens that whenever a priests or anyone else for that matter receives Communion while in the state of Mortal sin, he commits a serious sacrilege and possibly scandal! God bless, yours in Their Hearts, Kenneth M. Fisher, Founder & Chairman Concerned Roman Catholics of America, Inc.

Posted Tuesday, November 11, 2008 8:13 AM By JLS
Archbishop Nicolas Cotugno "explained that canon law stipulates that “all those who vote, support and promote abortion are, in fact, excommunicated. And it is an excommunication that, according to canon law, is immediate. They are ipso facto excommunicated.” -- See the story above for Nov 11, “Ipso facto excommunicated” The late Pope John Paul II expressed puzzlement that so many people could not understand his plain meaning on a particular point of contention. The problem is this, that without faith, no matter how tecnically precise the explanation, it cannot be understood. Men like Kmiec simply demonstrate their complete lack of faith. But it is really worse than this; since there is no reality to a position of absolute faithlessness, then Kmiec has put his faith somewhere other than in the Church and in Christ. So, it is not that he has no faith, but that his faith is in the devil or in money or power or sex, but it is not in Christ. This authority grab is what has the bishops, archbishops, cardinals and the Pope up in arms.

Posted Tuesday, November 11, 2008 10:33 AM By Fr. M.P.
John F. Maguire says "the presence of such [proportional] reasons, as Cardinal Ratzinger has made clear, renders a vote for an abortocratic candidate 'remote' material cooperation in the evil of abortion, and therefore 'permissible'." Pope B16 (then Cardinal) indicates the *principle* that proportionate reasons can be used. However, the 100 or so Bishops who spoke authoritatively on interpreting such circumstances for the 2008 election have said clearly that no proportionate reason exists for an Obama-type candidate at this moment. One cannot turn the explanation of the principle into an excuse to ignore the death culture for 'broader issues.' *IF* there were two Obama-types running, then other issues could be used as differentiators.

Posted Tuesday, November 11, 2008 2:02 PM By Kenneth M. Fisher
JLS, Actually Kmiec has put his "faith" in an appointment to the Highest Court of Our Land. I don't call it Supreme because there really is only one Supreme Court and there is no appeal from that Court. May God have mercy on Doug Kmiec's poor compromised soul. How many of you will join us tonight at 6:30 PM at St. Johns Seminary in Camarillo, CA for a candlelight prayer vigil demonstration because Kmiec is speaking there? God Bless, Yours in Their Hearts, Kenneth M. Fisher, Founder & Chairman Concerned Roman Catholics of America, Inc.

Posted Tuesday, November 11, 2008 3:18 PM By Robert J. Sutton
I am shocked and saddened that Professor Doug Kmeic has been invited to speak at St. John's Seminary. I have heard Kmeic Debate and Lecture on his abortion position. Why don't you invite Planned Parenthood it is the same bottom line. Saddened Catholic Robert J. Sutton

Posted Tuesday, November 11, 2008 3:40 PM By John F. Maguire
In reply to Fr. M.P: You will have to quote specific bishops here, as the two bishops in Kansas who appear to have departed from Cardinal Ratzinger's letter, expressly disavowed doing so in their *episcopal* capacity; nor did Archbishop Chaput invoke his episcopacal authority when he engaged Douglas Kmiec as author to author rather than--the Archbishop makes this clear in his ENDOW talk--with any note of episcopal authority attaching to his remarks. Of course, if, as Garvan has suggested, there is something defective in then-Cardinal Ratzinger's 2904 letter to Cardinal McCarrick in the first place, Pope Benedict XVI will have to revisit it. Indeed, the entire episcopacy will have to revisit it.

Posted Tuesday, November 11, 2008 6:33 PM By JLS
I recall the months of exciting blogging with the transexuals and various outrageous homosexualists. One thing they always had in common was the pattern of shirking the important issues and attempting to devolve the argument into a vast array of minutia which amounted to nothing more than techniques for abusing creation and God. Same thing here on this Kmiec debate, his apologist insists on devolving the issue down into a deep place of mystery, such as the Apostle St John the Evangelist explains concerning two of the Seven Churches which were being nearly completely seduced by Satan.

Posted Tuesday, November 11, 2008 6:34 PM By JLS
Kenneth, I'll be with you in spirit at your demonstration.

Posted Tuesday, November 11, 2008 11:03 PM By David L. Gamaliel
I went to the lecture this evening. There has been a LOT of bearing false witness against one's neighbor on this site. Kmiec is expressly, clearly and unambiguously opposed to abortion. He challenged Republicans who "say" they are pro-life, but when they have control of the presidency, senate and house do little (virtually nothing) of significance to stop the infanticide (my words). He concluded that Obama's policies, by actually offering poor women the real option of keeping their unborn babies, was actually more pro-life than the say-much-but-do-darn-little Republicans. A lot of people were forced to reconsider their support of BOTH sides of this question.

Posted Tuesday, November 11, 2008 11:12 PM By David L. Gamaliel
I went to the lecture this evening. There has been a LOT of bearing false witness against one's neighbor on this site. Kmiec is expressly, clearly and unambiguously opposed to abortion. He challenged Republicans who "say" they are pro-life, but when they have control of the presidency, senate and house do little (virtually nothing) of significance to stop the infanticide (my words). He concluded that Obama's policies, by actually offering poor women the real option of keeping their unborn babies, was actually more pro-life than the say-much-but-do-darn-little Republicans. A lot of people were forced to reconsider their support of BOTH sides of this question.

Posted Wednesday, November 12, 2008 1:45 PM By Dai Yoshida
David L. Gamaliel: You're not making sense. Obama said, “The first thing I’d do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act.” How is this pro-life? Social programs Obama proposes are already in place in Europe. It did not reduce abortion there and it will not reduce abortion in this country. I can't believe that Kmiec is ignorant of the facts. My only conclusion is that he is lying through his teeth.

Posted Wednesday, November 12, 2008 6:16 PM By Kenneth M. Fisher
I am happy to report that from 40 to 50 true members of the "Church Militant" turned up outside the gates of what was before Mahony a Catholic Seminary (there are seminarians there who are trying to become real Catholic priests, but against real hard circumstances)and some went inside. Many persons leaving the talk thanked us for being there and giving witness. No one told us we were "bearing false witness"! From what Gamaliel has said, I would venture to say that he is probably a supporter of Barak Hussein Muhammed Obama! I was outside, but from what one of our people inside told me, this poor soul is completely devoid of any real logic in his arguments in support of the most pro-abortion, pro-sodomite politician ever elected to the White House! God have mercy on our poor Nation! God bless, yours in Their Hearts, Kenneth M. Fisher, Founder & Chairman Concerned Roman Catholics of America, Inc.

Posted Thursday, November 13, 2008 6:16 AM By Dai Yoshida
Thank you Kenneth. You are an inspiration to us all. I'm sorry I couldn't be there with you.

Posted Thursday, November 13, 2008 3:03 PM By David L. Gamaliel
Kenneth Fisher, how does "Muhammed" fit into President Obama's name? If you can't be honest about that, why should we believe you in anything else? You don't have the right to spread lies and make innuendos and stretch the truth about people you disagree with. I stick with "bearing false witness" with everyone above who posted that Kmiec was pro-abortion. He very expressly condemned abortion. Kmiec is not Obama. Disagree all you want with the way Kmiec resolved the vote question, but report accurately what he holds or be silent. Lies are tools of the Father of Lies, even when spoken by people who would defend the unborn. In fact, when we lie to make our case, we weaken it. When we resort to a lack of charity and honesty we become less persuasive. We end up looking like irrational fanatics. We certainly cannot claim, while misrepresenting those we disagree with, to be followers of the Lord Jesus Christ, who is the way, the TRUTH, and the life. We aren't held to a lesser standard because we are passionate.

Posted Friday, November 14, 2008 5:29 AM By Dai Yoshida
David L. Gamaliel: How about addressing the issue rather than pretending to be enraged over Kenneth's flippant insertion into Obama's name. Spreading lies? I think you're way off mark on that one. I think you're the one starting to look like an irrational fanatic. Are you connected to Kmiec? Are you Kmiec in disguise?

Posted Saturday, November 15, 2008 7:03 PM By Mark from PA
I just read today of many incidents of anger over the election of Obama. Incidents number in the hundreds. As mentioned on another thread, some people are using the name Obama as an epithet. There have been cross burnings and figures hung from nooses. Children have taunted other children with chants of "Assassinate Obama." A woman who lives near my brother had her Obama signs trashed and people left two pizza boxes filled with feces on her doorstep. There is much hatred by some against those who voted for Obama.

Post your Comment
Name:
Email: (Optional: Will not display)
Comment:
 
Comments are limited to 1500 characters, and cannot contain offensive or libelous language. For security, comments cannot contain html tags, including < and > symbols - and NO URLS or LINKS. Comments will appear after they have been approved by the editor. Inclusion of your email address is optional so the editor may contact you.



Calcatholic Mobile
Optimized for your
mobile device











Visitors since January 1st, 2009:
javascript hit counter

website created by Vigil Studios © 2006 -  www.vigilstudios.com