Skip to comments.Judgement Day for Sean Hannity
Posted on 03/10/2007 1:25:48 PM PST by CatQuilt
Sean Hannity... Wow. Well, this should be a surprise to exactly no one, but ... watch this. (Source)
(Actually, it might be better to just go here - look the right side at "Hot Video." 'Cause it's hot. - "Judgment Day for Sean."
In short: Sean Hannity running all over Fr. Tom Euteneuer of Human Life International for questioning his rejection of the Church's teaching on birth control.
(Excerpt) Read more at amywelborn.typepad.com ...
Would a Catholic please explain to me where the teaching comes from about no birth control? I know what I have been told by non-Catholics, but am unclear if that is the official teaching.
I'm all for cafeteria Catholicism. I don't think the teaching on Birth Control is biblical. But I see their point about how utterly selfish people are about bearing children nowadays.
Ping to watch later
I can't get the link to the video to work... anyone have any ideas?
Ah I got it now never mind.
Go to the Amy Welborn blog entry (i.e. the article's link), she had links to other sources that I didn't post above...
Humility is a virtue that Hannity does not visit.
When he got to the point of endorsing birth control for faiths outside Catholicism I thought that was acceptable, but up until that I was thinking the whole thing was about Sean admitting that they themselves use birth control as Catholics.
What particularly irked me was the gross mishandling of the "judge not lest ye be judged" verse, as so many people do.
Basically, when a husband and wife have sex, they must be open to life. All forms of Christianity taught this till the 1930s when many Protestant groups backed off from this teaching. The Pill is especially bad because it is an abortificant.
That part I knew but where does this teaching come from? What Biblical foundation?
He is, however, not entitled to do so and claim to be a devout Catholic.
He should have the courage of Martin Luther and do what his conscience tells him is necessary. Anything else is hypocrisy and cowardice.
There are rules. You can follow them or not, as you choose. But you can't choose not to follow them and claim to be abiding by the rules. If you choose to not follow them out of conscience that is an act of courage, but you must also be totally willing to pay the price of your actions.
The excerpt below is from the book I happen to be reading right now, a light weight SF piece in the Honor Harrington series by David Weber (Crown of Slaves). It is only relevant because it encapsulates my thinking on this notion, in any field, be it religion or politics, better than most anything I've come across. It is an exchange between two characters on first meeting:
Oversteegen, smiling thinly, gave the crowd his own quick overview. "Only reason I agreed t' come t' this Walpurgis Night of prattlin' political heathens."
He bestowed the smile on Cathy, widening it a bit. "Present company excepted, of course. I've long had a grudgin' admiration for the Countess hereformer Countess, I suppose I should say. Ever since the speech she gave at the House of Lords which got her pitched out on her ear. I was there in person, as it happens, observin' as a member of the family since my mother was indisposed. And I'll tell you right now that I would have voted for her expulsion from the Lords myself, had I been old enough at the time, on the simple grounds that she had, in point of fact, violated long established protocol. Even though, mind you, I agreed with perhaps ninety percent of what she'd said. Still, rules are rules."
Cathy smiled back. "Rules were meant to be broken."
"Don't disagree," Oversteegen replied immediately. "Indeed they are. Providin', however, that the one breakin' the rules is willin' t' pay the price for it, and the price gets charged in full."
He gave Cathy a deep nod, almost a bow. "Which you were, Lady Catherine. I saluted you for it thenat the family dinner table that night, in fact. My mother was infinitely more indisposed thereafter; tottered back t' her sick bed cursin' me for an ingrate. My father was none too pleased, either. I salute you for it, again."
Turning back to Du Havel: "Otherwise, breakin' rules becomes the province of brats instead of heroes. Fastest way I can think of t' turn serious political affairs int' a playpen. A civilized society needs a conscience, and conscience can't be developed without martyrsreal onesagainst which a nation can measure its crimes and sins."
Du Havel's interest perked up sharply. He understood the logic of Oversteegen's argument, naturally. It would have been surprising if he hadn't, since it was a paraphrasenot a bad one either, given the compression involvedof the basic argument Du Havel had advanced in one of his books.
Oversteegen immediately confirmed his guess. "I should tell you that I consider The Political Value of Sacrifice one of the finest statements of conservative principle in the modern universe. Havin' said that, I also feel obliged t' inform you that I consider the arguments you advanced in Scales of Justice: Feathers Against Stones t' beat best!a sad lapse int' liberal maudlinism. Principles are principles, Doctor Du Havel. You, of all people, should know that. So it was sad t' see you maunderin' from one compromise t' another, tradin' away clarity for the sake of immediate benefit. Sad, sad. Practically gave social engineerin' your blessin', you did."
Hallelujah! Du Havel began plucking at his sleeves, in a vain attempt to find the buttons so he could roll them up.
Sean's actions are clearly not those of a hero in this sense, certainly not one who is "willin' t' pay the price" for his actions. I'm all too convinced that this is true in all areas of his life. There's nothing wrong with not being a martyr. Martyrs tend to live short and painful lives. There are heroic aspects to a life lived without overt heroic acts. Getting up every day to go to work and earn a living and support and raise a family is a heroic act, though not on the scale being discussed here.
Adhering to these principles, however, is required of someone who will presume to stand up and lecture to others.
I agree. I do think people have the freedom to choose not to have children at any given point in time. But they should examine closely their motive for doing so...a hardness of heart toward children should not be cultivated.
I tend to lean toward the idea that birth control is a selfish idea. And yet, I would rather people used it than abort later. If any method is used it should be a method which is not an abortifacient (e.g. an abortifacient such as the pill or IUD). Further I would rather they abstain totally, but that isn't really much of an option within marriage. I do think that an abused woman should use birth control to prevent bringing children into an abusive situation. We studied the Catholic-endorsed NFP materials and we used that to space our children though we aren't Catholic. I found it very informative and I thought they made very good points on most things. I do think more young people need to be educated about the dangers, both physical and spiritual, of reliance on birth control. I would certainly be more lenient than Catholics on when it is acceptable to use NFP.
Ok. But I still want to know, where does the idea birth control is wrong come from. What Biblical foundation? It wasn't pulled out of the sky.
No it wasn't. Start with Genesis 38 (esp. 9-10). Basically, that says it all, but there are numerous other biblical references.
"Ok. But I still want to know, where does the idea birth control is wrong come from. What Biblical foundation? It wasn't pulled out of the sky."
That is very true. The Biblical basis for belief against unnatural means of family planning comes from Genesis 38:6-10. In that passage, Onan withdrew from Tamar in order to avoid the possibility of impregnating her. From verse 10, "And what he did was displeasing in the sight of the Lord, and He slew him also." Since Onan's father also broke the Law of the Levirate (in a different way), but was not killed by the Lord, it was seen that Onan's act of withdrawal was what was displeasing to God.
And the post about how, historically, all Christian denominations were against artificial birth control is very correct. When the Church of England decided, in 1930, to allow birth control in "hardship cases," this decision was denounced vehemently by every other denomination. However unfortunately, somewhere along the line the injunction against artifical family planning got turned into a "Catholic" issue, which it never was.
Also, many forms of birth control used today actually act as abortifacients. Your doctor doesn't tell you that when he prescribes you progesterone-based forms of contraception or an IUD.
As far as Catholic teaching is concerned, the only form of acceptable family planning is so-called Natural Family Planning, which uses only a couple's awareness of a woman's fertility. It is also been extensively scientifically tested and proven to be 98.5% effective when used properly, making it comparable to artificial means), and so unreliability can't be cited against it. However, intention is equally as important as method. NFP should be used only if a couple is unable for practical reasons to have children at a certain time (for example, due to health concerns). If a couple uses NFP with the intention of completely avoiding childbearing and never having a woman become pregnant, then it is just as sinful as using artificial contraception. Both means and intention matter.
It's not hard to find Catholics that don't pick and choose what values are convenient for them to follow. My husband and I practice NFP now, as we don't feel we could adequately care for children until after I am out of medical school and he is out of the military and not constantly deployed. It truly does work, and it's really not difficult at all once you learn your body's cues.
Now, since I know that Catholic-bashing is very fashionable for many on this forum (I am not saying specifically by the poster to whom this message responds, but in general), I'll be logging off after I post this message, since I post very infrequently. Anyone who chooses to flame will have to find another Catholic to target.
What if My wife and I want to have sex just for the pleasure of it and we aren't looking to have any kids? Is it such a bad thing to take measures to prevent it? Would you support a ban on birth control?
Onan recieved a more severe punishment- being struck down dead. If you look up the other threads, there are numerous other indications that people are not to interfere with God's tole in conception. Where in the Bible does it state that birth control is okay? Like homosexuality, people knew it was against God's law.
About homosexuality...wow many references against.
People still come up with the same excuses, that the person wasn't just punished for homosexuality, but some other issue. Birth control is a recreation of homsexual sex, anyway.
Fr. Euteneuer was born in Detroit, Michigan in 1962, the fourth of seven children born to Joseph and Mariann Euteneuer. He has a Bachelor's degree in Philosophy from the University of Notre Dame in Indiana as well as a Licentiate degree in Biblical Theology from the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome, Italy. He is fluent in Spanish.
While in college, Fr. Euteneuer participated in the Marine Corps Officer Candidate Program, attended boot camp at Quantico, Virginia and graduated at the top of his Company. After discerning that the Lord was calling him to the priesthood rather than the military, he entered the seminary. After his ordination in 1988, Fr. Euteneuer served as a parish priest in five parishes of the Diocese of Palm Beach, Florida, secretary to the diocesan bishop, director of vocations, and spiritual moderator for the diocesan Respect Life Office.
His pro-life activity began in the early years of his priesthood with prayer vigils, pilgrimages, pickets at abortion mills, sidewalk counseling and the establishment of a crisis pregnancy center across the street from an abortion mill
Since taking office at HLI, Fr. Euteneuer has spoken to thousands of people all over the world spreading the Gospel of Life as well as making many appearances on EWTN and other local, national and international media. He has been featured in Human Events and National Catholic Register and has recently been awarded the John Cardinal O’Connor Award for Life from Legatus.
because birth control kills fertilized eggs - essentially an abortion
Give me a break on the cafeteria catholic nonsense already. So are you and all Americans.
Euteneuer is all wet on several fronts:
FIRST: Euteneuer has all this courage to nail Hannity in a public forum because he knows Hannity respects the faith and would basically be deferential. Does the good padre nail rank-apostate-abortionist "catholics" like Chris Matthews publically? Of course not because Matthews would bite his head off and grind him to powder.
Also, Euteneuer's "ministry" is flourishing quite well which means no threats, no persecution and basically giving a pass to the rancorous apostate LEFT.
I don't need to be warned about Sean Hannity.
SECOND: Euteneuer damns himself by his own words. Here is what he says
" I suspect that a great number of Catholics live their faith in the same way rule-bound and juvenile but we need something better from a public 'Catholic' like Hannity. We need a vibrant witness of someone who knows and embraces his Faith as deeply as he articulates his political passions. "
COMMENT: [THIS IS MEANINGLESS...Catholicism is a HUGE rule-based religion. Define "vibrant"...are you charismatic ?]
"If apologies are the order of the day, then the repentance I would like to hear out of Sean Hannity's mouth is for his shameless even scandalous promotion of birth control. Yes, I have heard him personally say, 'I have no problem with birth control. It's a good thing.'" (Another bit of profound theological reasoning.) Given the size of his audience and the importance of his status in pop culture, Hannity's anti-witness to a fundamental tenet of Catholic moral doctrine is just devastating for the faith of others who may be weak or vacillating in this area. His impact is greater, and so his judgment will be stricter. 'To those who have been given more, more will be required...'?"
COMMENT: [HERE, EUTENEUER DAMNS HIMSELF. He says Sean promotes birth control when Euteneuer himself is the BIGGEST PROMOTER OF Contraception on the planet!!! Parse the word class: Contra(against) Ception (conception) He does it with the tools of the latest most sophisticated science that involves all kinds of hoop jumping, selective abstinence, taking temperatures, tracking monthly cycles...ALL FOR THE PURPOSE OF FAMILIES AVOIDING CHILDREN.
Yet Euteneuer pats himself on the back for having no man-made items in the conjugual act itself (drugs IUDs, etc)
If successful, Euteneuer is EUGENICS boy and the result would be fertility rates of formerly catholic countries of Italy, Spain, Germany -- about 1.3 children per family. Will his Lord say at the particular judgment "well done thou good and faithful servant" for all this energy in helping catholic families avoid the blessing of children in their life? (Psalm 127:5)
Now, if it were possible, what do you think Pius V or Pius X would say to Euteneuers eugenics program here to promote the practice of severely limiting children to catholic families? Pius X would excommunicate him on the spot and Pius V would flog him.
Euteneuer comes across as a coward and frankly a homoosexual. Read Randy Engel's work "Rite of Sodomy" it is all there. He is a Gen X Vatican II "priest" from the gristmill of syncretism -- a potpourri of esoteric notions of psychobabble and catholic teaching.
He is also cowardly selective in who he attacks. Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, Paul Begala, Pat Leahy and other catholics who could shut him down? All we get from Euteneuer on these people is SILENCE. Hardly in the tradition of Perpetua, Lucia, Agatha, Agnes and Lawrence is it?
Has Euteneuer even been dragged away from abortion clinics ala Randall Terry? I doubt it.
Sean Hannity is fine. He wrote an endorsement of Howard Crocker's "Triumph" and somehow Crocker took that endorsement from a damned soul according to Euteneuer.
Finally, Euteneuer admonishes us:
The moral of the story is that Catholic men and women in the media need to be truly Catholic or at least stop being hypocrites........
I agree padre, so look in the mirror already
Gen 1:28, 9:1,7; 35:11 - from the beginning, the Lord commands us to be fruitful ("fertile") and multiply. A husband and wife fulfill God's plan for marriage in the bringing forth of new life, for God is life itself.
Gen. 28:3 - Isaac's prayer over Jacob shows that fertility and procreation are considered blessings from God.
Gen. 38:8-10 - Onan is killed by God for practicing contraception (in this case, withdrawal) and spilling his semen on the ground.
Gen. 38:11-26 - Judah, like Onan, also rejected God's command to keep up the family lineage, but he was not killed.
Deut. 25:7-10 - the penalty for refusing to keep up a family lineage is not death, like Onan received. Onan was killed for wasting seed.
Gen. 38:9 - also, the author's usage of the graphic word "seed," which is very uncharacteristic for Hebrew writing, further highlights the reason for Onan's death.
Exodus 23:25-26; Deut. 7:13-14 - God promises blessings which include no miscarriages or barrenness. Children are blessings from God, and married couples must always be open to God's plan for new life with every act of marital intimacy.
Lev.18:22-23;20:13 - wasting seed with non-generative sexual acts warrants death. Many Protestant churches, which have all strayed from the Catholic Church, reject this fundamental truth (few Protestants and Catholics realize that contraception was condemned by all of Christianity - and other religions - until the Anglican church permitted it in certain cases at the Lambeth conference in 1930. This opened the floodgates of error).
Correct, and Euteneuer with his ministry of contraception the "natural way" violates ALL of these...his goal is LOW yield child bearing and he rests in the fact it is done without drugs or devices ...what a hypocrite.
If successful, Euteneuer would achieve fertility rates below Western Europe (roughly 1.2 per family). What a guy.
The irony in all this is that condoms allow for more conception than Euteneuer touts for his science-intensive methods. Imagine that.
i trust that both of you have at least 5 children?
I'm dissapointed in Sean, but then again I've grown weary of his program long ago. He was spastic before the November elections!
In his defense, and maybe others will note differently, though I'm aware that he's a Catholc I really don't think he puts it out on the table that often. Seems to me that he avoids making it known.
As for "judge not lest ye be judged" - this Biblical verse is the haven of ALL liberal scoundrels, In fact, it's the only one they believe. Too bad for Hannity,
Did your post get cut off? You ended with a comma. Yep I agree that "judge not" gets trodden into the ground by the liberals who use it as a shield to hide/excuse their false teachings and bad behavior. Sean used it the same way they did.
I still like him though... I like his spunk. Same as I still like Ann Coulter though she says some stuff that is just outlandish at times... stuff I wish I could get away with saying. (smile)
You might want to read Charles Provan's The Bible and Birth Control. Provan is a Protestant by the way. Also, you might want to contact the organization called Protestants Against Birth Control and ask them about it.
###" I suspect that a great number of Catholics live their faith in the same way rule-bound and juvenile but we need something better from a public 'Catholic' like Hannity. We need a vibrant witness of someone who knows and embraces his Faith as deeply as he articulates his political passions. "####
Now, the rest of the story:
"For example, last Friday Sean Hannity took a few moments out of his afternoon radio show to make an apology. When I heard that the rather brash Hannity was actually going to apologize for something I was interested to find out what that would be. At first he sounded very sincere in saying we have to take responsibility for our mistakes. Fine so far. Then he went on to tell his hearers that he had taken two bites of a chicken sandwich that day because he had been traveling and literally forgot it was a Friday of Lent. He stopped eating it when he realized it was a Friday, but he used the opportunity on the show to make a fairly big deal about the "eat meat on Friday and you can go to hell" issue.
Well, even though he claims to be a "good Catholic," Hannity is hardly a credible commentator on Catholic matters. The chicken sandwich scandal was fairly trivial in the overall scheme of his show, but it said much more about the depth of his faith than anything else. I suspect that a great number of Catholics live their faith in the same way - rule-bound and juvenile - but we need something better from a public "Catholic" like Hannity. We need a vibrant witness of someone who knows and embraces his Faith as deeply as he articulates his political passions.
Just for the record, he did not commit a sin when he ate the chicken sandwich - he had no intention to violate the Church precept, and he corrected himself immediately when he realized what he did. That's not a sin, and issuing a dramatic "apology" for doing that is, well, entertainment, not witness. This, unfortunately, is what passes for a deep discussion of the Catholic Faith in the public forum nowadays.
If apologies are the order of the day, then the repentance I would like to hear out of Sean Hannity's mouth is for his shameless - even scandalous - promotion of birth control. Yes, I have heard him personally say, "I have no problem with birth control. It's a good thing." (Another bit of profound theological reasoning.) Given the size of his audience and the importance of his status in pop culture,
Hannity's anti-witness to a fundamental tenet of Catholic moral doctrine is just devastating for the faith of others who may be weak or vacillating in this area. His impact is greater, and so his judgment will be stricter. "To those who have been given more, more will be required..."
The moral of the story is that Catholic men and women in the media need to be truly Catholic or at least stop being hypocrites. We have enough pretenders to the title of Catholic in public life without being treated to superficial assessments of profound moral issues. Rules are important, but Lent is not about rule-breaking, it's about conversion of heart; and on the most important moral issues of our day, public Catholics like Hannity have no right to profess "another gospel," or the faith of millions - and indeed their own souls - are in serious jeopardy.
BTW, Father says an excellent Latin Mass!
As stated where's the meat in your tirade?
3 sons, 3 daughters, 7 grandchildren and 1 great grandchild.
Fr. Euteneuer teaches what the Magesterium and the Catachism states. He does not make the rules as he goes along.
The best kept secret in the Church today is Natural Family Planning. This is perhaps because progressive Catholics, who control most of the Church's teaching apparatus, have never focused on it. They think it part of the baggage of Humanae Vitae, a document they condemn out of hand without really pondering its contents.
This attitude shows people that the Church sees the conjugal act as more than just for having babies, but is also an expression of love and unity between the husband and wife.
"What if My wife and I want to have sex just for the pleasure of it and we aren't looking to have any kids?"
Oh, so you just want to use each other for pleasure, right? No, of course not. I always think of what that very non-Christian Ghandi said: "Contraceptives are an insult to woman hood. The difference between a prostitute and a woman using contraceptives is only this that the former sells her body to several men, the latter sells it to one man."
"Is it such a bad thing to take measures to prevent it?"
When exactly is it a good thing to do what is evil just because it is convenient and accepted by society?
"Would you support a ban on birth control?"
I would, but then again, our society DID ban contraceptives not all that many decades ago.
Years ago, when I was young and apostate, my wife used oral contraceptives. When we eventually decided to have children it took us 3 and a half years to finally conceive.
I can't help but wonder about what these pills may have done to my wife's body in the long run. Hopefully, I just worry too much.
Its result is heinous though. God gives positive commands to multiply, and calls children a blessing. Euteneuer stubs all this out and then slides in under a technicality of avoiding explicit edicts of Humanae Vitae of articial birth control.
His process and program is most destructive however. It basiically destroys catholic progeny, allows for family planning at a percentage far greater than anyone ever claims for condoms. Irony of ironies......
No one knew of such science-based process prescriptive methods until the last 15-20 years. Explain the same program to St Pius V or X and what would they say about it? They would throw up and the former would flog him.
There are several problems with that:
This is weasel wording. "Healthy spacing" of children is strict abstinence until St. Paul admonishes you coming back together so as not to "burn with passion." (1 Cor 7).
Euteneuer promotes this process as a hugely successful contra (against) ception (conception) that one poster on this forum bragged about "we've been successful with this for 7 years..." meaning, I've avoided getting any new brats from the Lord. He may be willing but I'm not. btw, (implied,) the sex is great) "
Agree on your points here but consider while Mosaic law gave stricter penalties (some 35 capital statutes), the Sermon on the Mount raises the standard very high. Instead of getting by with being a "non-murderer" Christ says you can't get angry without a cause. Instead of being a "non-adulterer" Christ says you can't lust in your heart. So, Christ teaches us about the spirit of the law.
Euteneuer is patting himself on the back by being a non-IUD/non-drug-pill promoter but he violates the spirit of God's law by showing hundreds and thousands of Catholics how to AVOID children at a better rate than artificial methods.
Hannity was out of sorts. Invalid arguments all over the place. He was completely wrong when he said that Fr. Eutenauer was doing more damage to the faith than he was.
Since when does bartering pieces of our faith help the faith?