Vatican official: approval of Doug Kmiec to U.S. Ambassador to the Vatican "will never happen"

An official from the Vatican's Secretary of State department has reacted to the recent suggestion that Pepperdine professor Douglas Kmiec should become the U.S. Ambassador to the Vatican by saying, "it will never happen.", Catholic News Agency reports:

The official noted that prominent American Catholics at the Vatican -such as Cardinal James Francis Stafford or Archbishop Raymond Burke- look at Kmiec as a "traitor," and "their opinion will certainly count heavily."

But most importantly, the official said, is that the Holy See will not risk alienating vital U.S. Catholic organizations like the Knights of Columbus or the American branch of the Knights of the Holy Sepulcher, "whose role in the life of the universal Church is decisive, and who have already expressed publicly their disappointment with Kmiec's role in the recent elections."

Sean Michael Winters of America Magazine had previously recommended Kmiec as the "perfect candidate" for the position:

He is a lifelong pro-life legal scholar who served as head of the Office of Legal Counsel in the Justice Departments of both Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. He was Dean of the Catholic University Law School and now teaches law at Pepperdine. His published works evidence a find legal mind and thorough familiarity with the natural law tradition that has been the dominant lens for Catholic social thought. Kmiec would be well known to prominent American churchmen in the Eternal City and a jewel in the crown of the intellectual milieu that surrounds the Holy See.

Winters is recipient of the less-than-coveted Father Richard McBrien Prize in Really Inept Vaticanology, named for the Notre Dame theologian who memorably announced that Joseph Ratzinger couldn’t possibly be elected pope, less than 24 hours before Ratzinger was elected", on account of his prediction that Pope Benedict, during his U.S. visit, would spurn President Bush by "[denouncing] the continuing U.S. occupation of Iraq before the U.N. General Assembly".

Catholic Campaign for Human Development - Tarnished by ACORN or Still Rotten Itself?

A "whack-job" with a sign protesting the second collection for the Catholic Campaign for Human Development sets Vox Nova's Morning's Minion on a tirade against Fr. Neuhaus and evangelicals:

After a moment of confusion, it suddenly dawned on me what this was about. And then I became rather angry. Yes, it was just one “whack-job”, but I was still angry. And then I thought of Fr. Richard John Neuhaus’s partially-successful attempt to align Catholics with the emergent right-wing evangelical movement, and realized that it had come to this. Catholics, including Neuhaus, were lambasting an anti-poverty program because it simply did not fit with the the ideological talking points of the hour.

As Fr. Neuhaus points out, "Ten years ago, CHD was exposed as using the Catholic Church as a milk cow to fund organizations that frequently were actively working against the Church’s mission, especially in their support of pro-abortion activities and politicians."

Pointing to the CCHD's stated principles, including that it "will not consider organizations which promote or support abortion, euthanasia, the death penalty, or any other affront to human life and dignity,” Morning's Minion dismisses Neuhaus' concerns:

This is important as many of the critics (including Neuhaus) claim it is funding pro-abortion activities. (Yet again, the mis-use of the abortion agenda as a Trojan horse to further a distinctly less noble cause– will this ever end?)

Unfortunately, Neuhaus' claim is true -- CCHD has a disappointing history of, contrary to its stated principles, providing extensive funding for questionable political groups with agendas morally at odds with Catholic teaching.

For a historical look at some of the problems with the CCHD, see A Commentary on the Campaign for Human Development by The Wanderer, or the following:

• Too close for comfort: CCHD, sex and abortion, by Patrick Reilly. Human Events November 20, 1998.
  
• Assessing the Catholic Campaign for Human Development, by Patrick Reilly. Human Events November 20, 1998.
  
• Catholic campaign for human development: Still entranced by leftist activism, despite growing unrest, by Kathryn Jean Lopez. Human Events November 10, 2000.
  

The question is whether the CCHD has adequately reformed and distanced itself from past behavior? -- As Fr. Neuhaus suggests, its financial support for the national "community organizer" / voter-registration group ACORN (7.3 million over the past decade; $1,037,000 in 2007) -- an organization which played an influential role in the rise of Barack Obama, local chapters of which are under criminal investigation in several states, and whose funding has been subsequently halted by the CCHD itself due to an ongoing investigation of embezzlement by Dale Rathke, brother of ACORN founder Wade Rathke, that was covered up, and flaunts a double standard on minimumum wage and refusing the right to organize by its own members -- may be cause for parishioners to take a closer look at other groups the CCHD has been funding.

For more see The Capital Research Center's investigation: "ACORN: Who Funds the Weather Underground's Little Brother?" (Foundation Watch November 2008) or In a Rotten Nutshell: Everything You’ve Ever Wanted to Know about ACORN (Labor Watch November 2008).

* * *

Despite the controversies surrounding the CCHD, John Allen, Jr. reports that many Bishops turned out for a reception hosted by the CCHD during the USCCB's conference in Baltimore:

Several bishops said privately that they turned out for the CCHD reception in large part to show support, especially in the lead-in to the annual collection later this month. (To be fair, invitations distributed for the event promised “heavy hors d’oeuvres” and an “open bar,” which may also have had something to do with it.)

The Obamas Don't Need School Vouchers

But, if you are living in a terrible public school district, as many Americans are, you may need vouchers so your kids can hope to get out of poverty. Today's N.Y. Times announces that the Obama's have chosen the cream of the elite schools in the D.C. area for their two young daughters at a price tag of over $29,000 per year. Here is the link. It's blatant social injustice to want what's best for your own kids but to refuse school vouchers to other kids. It's also rank hypocrisy: the change that wasn't. The elitism that always is.

Obama chooses Tom Daschle for Health & Human Services; Described as "Pro-Life Nightmare"

Barack Obama has chosen Tom Daschle as the new Secretary for Health and Human Services. Catholic Online calls him a "Pro-Life Nightmare". Catholic News Agency reports that Daschle's record of supporting anti-life initiatives is extensive enough that his bishop previously asked him to stop calling himself a Catholic.:

Although Bishop Robert Carlson had been in conversation with Daschle for years about his voting record and beliefs about moral issues, including a public argument over partial-birth abortion in 1997, it wasn’t until April of 2003 that things began to escalate. At that point Bishop Carlson sent a letter to Tom Daschle telling him that he should removed all references to being a member of the Catholic Church from his congressional biography and campaign documents, Bottum reports.

Daschle responded to the letter from the floor of the Senate in Washington by accusing Bishop Carlson of acting in a way "more identified with the radical right than with thoughtful religious leadership."

See Tom Daschle's Duty to Be Morally Coherent (Weekly Standard April 17, 2003) for details.

NARAL, however, has mixed feelings about the appointment:

Daschle's record on reproductive and sexual health and rights is a mixed one. NARAL Pro-Choice America rated him 50% for his support for the (non-medically termed) Partial Birth Abortion Ban, and for the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, a bill that allows a perpetrator to be prosecuted for two crimes in a violent crime against a pregnant woman. Daschle, also, however, opposes the ban on abortion procedures in military hospitals and supports expanding funding embryonic stem cell research.

Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, believes Daschle will be an effective representative for reproductive health access and rights issues in the White House, telling RH Reality Check, “Sen. Daschle will bring thoughtful progressive leadership to the Department of Health and Human Services. We appreciate his recent efforts to help defeat two abortion bans in South Dakota. We had a good working relationship with him during his tenure as Senate leader and look forward to continuing that relationship as he assumes this pivotal role in the Obama administration."

An Open Letter to President-Elect Barack Obama

President-elect Barack Obama,

As American Catholics, we, the undersigned, would like to reiterate the congratulations given to you by Pope Benedict XVI. We will be praying for you as you undertake the office of President of the United States.

Wishing you much good will, we hope we will be able to work with you, your administration, and our fellow citizens to move beyond the gridlock which has often harmed our great nation in recent years. Too often, partisan politics has hampered our response to disaster and misfortune. As a result of this, many Americans have become resentful, blaming others for what happens instead of realizing our own responsibilities. We face serious problems as a people, and if we hope to overcome the crises we face in today’s world, we should make a serious effort to set aside the bitterness in our hearts, to listen to one another, and to work with one another

One of the praiseworthy elements of your campaign has been the call to end such partisanship. You have stated a desire to engage others in dialogue. With you, we believe that real achievement comes not through the defamation of one’s opponents, nor by amassing power and using it merely as a tool for one’s own individual will. We also believe dialogue is essential. We too wish to appeal to the better nature of the nation. We want to encourage people to work together for the common good. Such action can and will engender trust. It may change the hearts of many, and it might alter the path of our nation, shifting to a road leading to a better America. We hope this theme of your campaign is realized in the years ahead.

One of the critical issues which currently divides our nation is abortion. As you have said, no one is for abortion, and you would agree to limit late-term abortions as long as any bill which comes your way allows for exceptions to those limits, such as when the health of the mother is in jeopardy. You have also said you would like to work on those social issues which cause women to feel as if they have a need for an abortion, so as to reduce the actual number of abortions being performed in the United States.

Indeed, you said in your third presidential debate, “But there surely is some common ground when both those who believe in choice and those who are opposed to abortion can come together and say, ‘We should try to prevent unintended pregnancies by providing appropriate education to our youth, communicating that sexuality is sacred and that they should not be engaged in cavalier activity, and providing options for adoption, and helping single mothers if they want to choose to keep the baby.’”

As men and women who oppose abortion and embrace a pro-life ethic, we want to commend your willingness to engage us in dialogue, and we ask that you live up to your promise, and engage us on this issue.

There is much we can do together. There is much that we can do to help women who find themselves in difficult situations so they will not see abortion as their only option. There is much which we can do to help eliminate those unwanted pregnancies which lead to abortion.

One of your campaign promises is of grave concern to many pro-life citizens. On January 22, 2008, the 35th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, when speaking of the current right of women in America to have abortions, you said, “And I will continue to defend this right by passing the Freedom of Choice Act as president.”

The Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) might well undermine your engagement of pro-life Americans on the question of abortion. It might hamper any effort on your part to work with us to limit late-term abortions. We believe FOCA does more than allow for choice. It may force the choice of a woman upon others, and make them morally complicit in such choice. One concern is that it would force doctors and hospitals which would otherwise choose not to perform abortions to do so, even if it went against their sacred beliefs. Such a law would undermine choice, and might begin the process by which abortion is enforced as a preferred option, instead of being one possible choice for a doctor to practice.

It is because of such concern we write. We urge you to engage us, and to dialogue with us, and to do so before you consider signing this legislation. Let us reason together and search out the implications of FOCA. Let us carefully review it and search for contradictions of those positions which we hold in common.

If FOCA can be postponed for the present, and serious dialogue begun with us, as well as with those who disagree with us, you will demonstrate that your administration will indeed be one that rises above partisanship, and will be one of change. This might well be the first step toward resolving an issue which tears at the fabric of our churches, our political process, our families, our very society, and that causes so much hardship and heartache in pregnant women.

Likewise, you have also recently stated you might over-ride some of President G.W. Bush’s executive orders. This is also a concern to us. We believe doing so without having a dialogue with the American people would undermine the political environment you would like to establish. Among those issues which concern us are those which would use taxpayer money to support actions we find to be morally questionable, such as embryonic stem cell research, or to fund international organizations that would counsel women to have an abortion (this would make abortion to be more than a mere choice, but an encouraged activity).

Consider, sir, your general promise to the American people and set aside particular promises to a part of your constituency. This would indicate that you plan to reject politics as usual. This would indeed be a change we need.

Deal W. Hudson Marjorie Campbell Rev. James A. Nowack Susan DeBoisblanc Joshua D. Brumfield Michael J. Iafrate Matthew Talbot Henry C Karlson III Adam P Verslype Michael J. Deem Natalie Mixa Anthony M. Annett Veronica Greenwell Robert C. Koerpel

Christopher Blosser Mark J. Coughlan Craig D. Baker Megan Stout Ashley M. Brumfield Natalie Navarro Paul Mitchell Josiah Neeley Katerina M. Deem Henry Newman Mickey Jackson Thomas Greenwell PhD Nate Wildermuth

Originally posted by Henry Karlson at Vox Nova

(Please visit Vox Nova for new signees to this letter).

Cardinal Sean O'Malley on the irony of an Obama victory

"When I was in high school, I joined the NAACP and did voter registration in black neighborhoods when I wasn't old enough to vote myself, and I was there at Resurrection City after Martin Luther King was murdered, and living in the mud with thousands of people on the lawn of the Lincoln Memorial and having off-duty redneck policemen throwing canisters of tear gas at us and shouting obscenities," O'Malley, now the cardinal-archbishop of Boston, said in an interview yesterday, his eyes welling with tears.

"So, to me, the election of an Afro-American is like the Berlin Wall falling. I mean, for my generation, I suppose young people today can't appreciate that, but to me it is something very big."

"My joy, however, is tempered by the knowledge that this man has a deplorable record when it comes to prolife issues, and is possibly in the pocket of Planned Parenthood, which, in its origins, was a very racist organization to eliminate the blacks, and it's sort of ironic that he's been co-opted by them."

"He is the president, and everyone wishes him well, and we will try to work with him. However, I hope he realizes that his election was not a mandate to rush ahead with a proabortion platform."

Interview with Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley
Michael Paulson / Boston Globe. November 11, 2008. (Read the whole thing).

Cardinal George: "The common good can never be adequately incarnated in any society when those waiting to be born can be legally killed at choice."

We can also be truly grateful that our country’s social conscience has advanced to the point that Barack Obama was not asked to renounce his racial heritage in order to be president, as, effectively, John Kennedy was asked to promise that his Catholic faith would not influence his perspective and decisions as president a generation ago. Echoes of that debate remain in the words of those who reject universal moral propositions that have been espoused by the human race throughout history, with the excuse that they are part of Catholic moral teaching. We are, perhaps, at a moment when, with the grace of God, all races are safely within the American consensus. We are not at the point, however, when Catholics, especially in public life, can be considered full partners in the American experience unless they are willing to put aside some fundamental Catholic teachings on a just moral and political order. The hubris that has isolated our country politically and now economically is heard, but not usually recognized, in moral arguments based simply and solely on individual moral autonomy. This personal and social dilemma is not, of course, a matter of ultimate importance, for America is not the Kingdom of God; but it makes America herself far less than she claims to be in this world.

At our meeting last spring, we heard statisticians tell us that the Catholic Church is a laboratory for our society. What the Church looks like today, in her ethnic composition, her economic situation, her generational cohorts, the entire country will look like in twenty five to thirty years. This gives Catholics a perhaps prophetic perspective on our society’s life and concerns. In Holy Scripture, a true prophet’s life is always marked by suffering. What is of major importance to us, as bishops of the Church, is that the Church remain true to herself and her Lord in the years to come, for only in being authentically herself will the Church serve society and its members, in time and in eternity.

In working for the common good of our society, racial justice is one pillar of our social doctrine. Economic justice, especially for the poor both here and abroad, is another. But the Church comes also and always and everywhere with the memory, the conviction, that the Eternal Word of God became man, took flesh in the womb of the Virgin Mary, nine months before Jesus was born in Bethlehem. This truth is celebrated in our liturgy because it is branded into our spirit. The common good can never be adequately incarnated in any society when those waiting to be born can be legally killed at choice. If the Supreme Court’s Dred Scott decision that African Americans were other people’s property and somehow less than persons were still settled constitutional law, Mr. Obama would not be president of the United States. Today, as was the case a hundred and fifty years ago, common ground cannot be found by destroying the common good.

Excerpt, Plenary Address by Francis Cardinal George, OMI

Obama poised to reverse Bush Administration policies on embryonic stem cell research, Mexico City Policy

The Washington Post reports that transition advisers have compiled a list of about 200 Bush administration actions and executive orders that could be swiftly undone to reverse White House policies:

Obama himself has signaled, for example, that he intends to reverse Bush's controversial limit on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research, a decision that scientists say has restrained research into some of the most promising avenues for defeating a wide array of diseases, such as Parkinson's.

Bush's August 2001 decision pleased religious conservatives who have moral objections to the use of cells from days-old human embryos, which are destroyed in the process.

But Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) said that during Obama's final swing through her state in October, she reminded him that because the restrictions were never included in legislation, Obama "can simply reverse them by executive order." Obama, she said, "was very receptive to that." Opponents of the restrictions have already drafted an executive order he could sign.

The new president is also expected to lift a so-called global gag rule barring international family planning groups that receive U.S. aid from counseling women about the availability of abortion, even in countries where the procedure is legal, said Cecile Richards, the president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America. When Bill Clinton took office in 1993, he rescinded the Reagan-era regulation, known as the Mexico City policy, but Bush reimposed it.

"We have been communicating with his transition staff" almost daily, Richards said. "We expect to see a real change."

ObamaCatholics - is this the change you were looking for?

Discussion of Catholics and abortion removed from still on Bishops' general conference agenda

Religion News Service reports that the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops' plans to discuss abortion and politics next week in Baltimore have been scuttled:

In a September, after high-profile Catholic politicians challenged church teaching on abortion, the bishops announced that they "plan to discuss the practical and pastoral implications of these serious matters at the U.S. bishops' Nov. 10-13, 2008 general meeting in Baltimore." ...

[Sister Mary Anne] Walsh said the bishops' discussion has been removed from the agenda as of late Friday. The agenda will not be finalized until Saturday afternoon, Walsh added.

"I think this is something that has evolved since September," Walsh said. "Many bishops have already addressed the issue (of pro-abortion rights politicians) through pastoral letters, so there's not the same need they saw in September."

The article mentions the likely possibility that the topic will be raised in close-door sessions, but Catholic News Service' Diogenes (Off The Record) is skeptical:

So what has "evolved" to allow the bishops to skip another difficult discussion? Let's see:

• Have prominent Catholic politicians ceased to be advocates of legal abortion? Not at all. This year's two most conspicuous offenders, Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi, will soon stand 2nd and 3rd in line for the nation's highest office. They continue to advance not only the 'culture of death' political agenda, but also a skewed quasi-Catholic theology to justify it.
  
• Have the bishops reached agreement on how to handle the problem? Nope. Right through Election Day individual bishops were issuing their contrasting statements, drawing out different aspects of their malleable common statement, Faithful Citizenship. The most forthright bishops were acknowledging that an air-clearing discussion was overdue.
  
• Have the media moved away from the issue, now that the campaign is over, so that the bishops can retreat into undisturbed silence, away from the glare of publicity? Bingo.

On the other hand, Amy Welborn advises us to "Chill, and Pray":

There are two days of public meetings and two days of private, executive sessions. The issue has obviously exploded beyond the relatively narrow agenda item originally planned for public discussion. I have no problem (as if it matters) with bishops taking this to private discussions in which they can speak freely to each other without the rest of us watching. As enjoyable as that might be for the rest of us.

As we celebrate the feast of the Dedication of St. John Lateran, the church of the Bishop of Rome, it seems a good idea to pray for our bishops. It’s particularly apropos on this day because St. John Lateran represents a great deal - and part of symbolism it bears after a millenium and a half regards the complicated and perpetually vexing relationship between Catholicism and civic life, the original church being built by Constantine and the palace, as the residence of the popes for almost a millenium being a center of both politics and religion in Rome - for good and for ill, for the benefit of the Body of Christ and sometimes to its great detriment.

Have you prayed for your bishop lately?

* * *

In other news, noting that Catholics voted 52 percent to 45 percent for Senator Barack Obama, Peter Steinfels recommended to the Bishops a change of strategy (Catholics and Choice (in the Voting Booth New York Times 11/07/08):

Anyone constructing a list of the big losers on Tuesday would probably include the nation’s Roman Catholic bishops. Will that fact be candidly addressed when the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops meets next week in Baltimore?" ...

If the bishops sweat a little over these figures next week, the reason won’t be worry about their political prowess but about their pastoral and moral effectiveness. By appearing to tie their moral stance on abortion so closely to a particular political choice, have they in fact undermined their moral persuasiveness on that issue as well as their pastoral effectiveness generally?

Update The Catholic News Agency says the meeting is on:

[A] bishop who requested anonymity, confirmed to CNA that the bishops will not drop the issue of abortion or hold the conversation behind closed doors. On the contrary, they will discuss it on no less than three occasions: “in our regional groups, in executive session, and in the public session.”

The sessions open to the media will take place on Monday, November 10, from 9:00 a.m. to mid-afternoon, and Tuesday, November 11, from 9:00 a.m. until mid-afternoon. The rest of the meeting will be for breakout sessions, executive sessions, and prayer and reflection.

Archbishop John Vlazny of Portland -- a member of the task force on the faith formation and sacramental practice -- confirms as well:

“We plan to set aside time to discuss practical and pastoral implications of political support for abortion, an issue that remains problematic for us and our people,” he confirmed.

Elections 2008 - Perspectives from Rome and the USCCB

Pope Benedict, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and a dean from the Regina Apostolorum Pontifical University weigh in on the results of the election.

• Pope Benedict conveyed his congratulations to President-elect Obama in a telegram sent through the U.S. ambassador to the Holy See, Mary Ann Glendon:

  The Holy Father promises Obama his prayers so that God assists him in his "weighty responsibilities at the service of the nation and the international community."
  

  The Italian-language message expresses the Pontiff's wish that the abundant blessings of the Lord "support you and the people of the United States in your efforts, together with all men and women of good will, to build a world of peace, solidarity and justice."

  Cardinal Francis George sent a message of congratulations on behalf of the United States Bishops' conference:

  I write to you, in my capacity as President of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, to express our congratulations on your historic election as President of the United States. The people of our country have entrusted you with a great responsibility. As Catholic Bishops, we offer our prayers that God give you strength and wisdom to meet the coming challenges.
  

  Our country is confronting many uncertainties. We pray that you will use the powers of your office to meet them with a special concern to defend the most vulnerable among us and heal the divisions in our country and our world. We stand ready to work with you in defense and support of the life and dignity of every human person.
  

  May God bless you and Vice President-elect Biden as you prepare to assume your duties in service to our country and its citizens.

  
  

• Fr. Thomas D. Williams, Dean of theology and professor of moral theology and Catholic social thought at the Regina Apostolorum Pontifical University in Rome, provides "a Roman perspective on the election" in a Q&A with National Review's Kathryn Jean Lopez. Here's a snippet:

  It would be rash to make a sweeping moral judgment on a group of people like the American voting public. Morality entails two dimensions: an objective dimension and a subjective dimension. The first dimension concerns whether a given choice or action is right or wrong in itself. The second dimension involves intention and moral knowledge. Our Catholic tradition has always recognized the possibility of “invincible ignorance,” whereby a person does something wrong while sincerely and perhaps blamelessly believing it to be right. I doubt many Americans voted for Obama thinking they were doing something wrong.
  

  On the other hand, this doesn’t mean that we aren’t morally responsible for this choice. Some people may have allowed more superficial concerns triumph over more weighty moral issues in determining which way they would vote. All who voted for Obama will in some way share in the responsibility for his actions as president, at least as far as they were foreseeable. As far as life issues, marriage, and school choice go (to take three key moral issues), we already know where Obama stands and what he intends to do. Personally, I wouldn’t want that on my conscience.

  Read the rest.
  

Election 2008 - Catholic Blogs Roundup

• Mark Shea puts things into perspective:

  I think it's really easy to miss the wood for the trees when contemplating this or any American election. Yeah, I think Obama will be a lousy President. But when I consider the fact that neither he nor any President has come to office by a) poisoning his predecessor, b) marshalling an army to lead a military coup that hails him as Supreme Maximum Leader, c) assuming power by taking his predecessor's concubines and bedding them in public before exiling his enemies from their homes, d) creating an army of child soldiers to terrorize, rape and murder in a genocidal rampage, e) rounding up his enemies and sending them to a gulag or forced labor camp, f) sending teams of assassins to drive ice picks through the brains of his rivals, g) being the deranged heir to the throne who appoints his horse a Senator or murders his scheming mother, h) being some despotic potentate whose rule reflects the inexorable will of Allah--or any of the other myriad crappy ways the human race has organized the state in the past, I have to say that I'm grateful.

• Commonweal gets cocky:

  Networks call Ohio for Obama. Game over. I never thought I would see this day. I guess (if certain Bishops are right) hell is going to be a little more crowded, but the company there will be good.

• Paul (Thoughts of a Regular Guy) rescinds his prohibition on linking to Vox Nova.

• Jeff Miller (Curt Jester)'s obligatory post-election rant:

  Now we will also have a culture of death Catholic Vice President who will be putting the vice into Vice President with his support of many forms of abortion. I bet the media can hardly wait to snap a picture of him receiving Communion to gloat. The USCCB meets soon to discuss "practical and pastoral implications of political support for abortion." Will the scandal of Sen. Biden be addressed? Probably not, but I would love to be wrong.
  

  I hear that Sen. Obama will be FedExing 30 pieces of silver to Doug Kmiec. Moloch is quite happy with all of the Catholics that voted for Sen. Obama. According to Catholic Culture "Among Catholic voters who attend Mass weekly, McCain won majority support: 54- 45%. Among those who do not attend weekly Mass, the margin for Obama was an overwhelming 61- 37%. Thus Obama drew his support from inactive Catholics." So 45 percent of Mass going Catholics supported the most extreme supporter of abortion ever in a Presidential race. The unborn chopped up via scalpels will be glad to hear about hope and change.

• Dale Price asks us to respond like Catholics:

  Obama is our next president, like it or not. Our marching orders are clear: Pray for him and our country, work with him where possible to achieve the common good, and fight like a Maccabee when he oversteps his bounds -- all the while remembering that November 2010 and 2012 will be here quicker than we think.

• MoveOn (Amy Welborn):

  the feeling is mitigated by the politics of the man elected as well as the campaign he headed, and I don’t think that wariness and sadness merits an apology. If the man’s policies and promises sadden and give us pause, are we required to bury that now?
  

  On message, yes. Unflappable, yes. But I disagree with most of his policy proposals at one level or another and believe the campaign was anything but noble. No campaign is without fault, and most are full of fault, and the Obama campaign was no different. In other words, it was not an admirable rise, in my opinion. The achievement is marred by dissembling about the candidate’s past, dishonesty and vitriol from surrogates, a viciousness which was never reigned in by the campaign, as well as near-cultishness and sycophancy for a very inexperienced candidate.
  

  And I’m not going to apologize for that qualification. Because I know full well that those who would scold about ruining the moment by consideration of such little things like policy would not - would not - be joyously basking in the historic moment if Sarah Palin were now the vice-president elect. Or president, it goes without saying. Not for a second. In fact, they would be infuriated.
  

  So here we are. ...

  
  

The Catholic Vote

Data on the Catholic Vote below is taken from the National Exit Polls.

 

Catholic Vote (27% of those surveyed)

Obama 54%

McCain 45%

 

White Catholic Vote (19% of those surveyed)

Obama 47%

McCain 52%

 

Catholics who attend Mass weekly (12% of those surveyed)

Obama 49%

McCain 50%

 

Catholics who attend Mass less often (14% of those surveyed)

Obama 58%

McCain 40%

 

My thoughts.

 

First, Catholics as a “bloc” make up less than a third of the electorate, but a shift of 6% of this “bloc” could have sent McCain to the White House. Here is a look at the Catholic Vote in some Battleground States:

 

Ohio

Obama 47%

McCain 52%

 

Florida

Obama 50%

McCain 49%

 

Pennsylvania

Obama 48%

McCain 52%

 

Indiana

Obama 50%

McCain 50%

 

New Mexico

Obama 71%

McCain 28%

 

Second, it is surprising that of those Catholics who attend Mass weekly, they split evenly between both candidates. I wonder how many of those 49% know about Obama’s promise to sign FOCA?

 

I am curious what our editors and readers think.

USCCB investigates $1 million church funding to ACORN

Just to update a prior post -- The Washington Times reports that the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has hired forensic accounting specialists to investigate more than $1 million in church funding to voter-registration group ACORN:

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has hired forensic accounting specialists to investigate more than $1 million in church funding to voter-registration group ACORN, fearing the money may have been spent in partisan or fraudulent ways that could jeopardize the church's tax-exempt status.

The investigation is "thorough, serious and ongoing," according to a July 11 letter to more than 200 bishops from New Orleans Bishop Robert Morin, chairman of the committee that oversees the Catholic Campaign for Human Development.

The CCHD sent $1,037,000 to the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) in 2007, including a $40,000 grant to an ACORN affiliate in Las Vegas that was raided last month by the Nevada attorney general's office in a voter-fraud probe.

The Catholic aid agency has given more than $7.3 million to ACORN over the past decade for about 320 projects, according to the Catholic News Service.

In June, the Catholic Church froze a $1.2 million grant for 38 ACORN chapters after the community-organizing group was accused of voter fraud in 15 states.

As we reported earlier, ACORN, having played in influential role in Obama's rise to the top of the political ladder, was handsomely rewarded by the Obama campaign via cash funneled to its front organization, Citizens Services, Inc. in 2008.

There isn't anything I can say tonight ...

... other than what Jay Anderson has already said here.

Thank you, Jay.

Knights of Columbus: "Remember FOCA on November 4th"

The Knights of Columbus remind us that among the most important issues at stake Nov. 4 is FOCA ["Freedom of Choice Act"]:

As the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops declared recently:

“Abortion rights groups and their allies in Congress are promoting a radical bill called the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA). If this extreme measure is enacted, widely-supported and constitutionally-sound abortion regulations will be knocked down nationwide.”

• FOCA would force taxpayers to fund abortions.
  
• FOCA would require all states to allow partial birth and other late term abortions.
  
• FOCA would violate the consciences of health care providers.

As Supreme Knight Car Anderson stated in a letter to all Knights, “All of the progress we’ve made over the past 35 years in trying to limit and reduce abortions in the United States – would be invalidated with the stroke of a pen if the next Congress passes, and the next president signs, the so-called Freedom of Choice Act.”

Before you cast your vote on Tuesday, Nov. 4, please take the time and effort necessary to learn whether candidates for whom you might vote favor or oppose FOCA.

House sponsors of FOCA

Senate sponsors of FOCA

If your local candidates are not sponsors of FOCA, ask their campaigns what their position on the bill is.

U.S. Sen. Barack Obama’s position on FOCA can be found on this page from his campaign Web site:

U.S. Sen. John McCain’s position on FOCA can be found on this page from his campaign Web site.