Skip to comments.Kmiec's epic fail in Time (point-by-point critique of his flawed arguments)
Posted on 02/23/2009 9:41:17 AM PST by NYer
When I found out Doug Kmiec had shot out an article for Time magazine in the wake of Pelosi's meeting with Pope Benedict, I geared myself up for yet another point-by-point critique of his flawed arguments.
This time, however, I don't even need to take the trouble, because the entire premise of Kmiec's latest piece is factually in error. To see why, first I will summarize Kmiec's argument.
"If you read [the pope's statement to pelosi] carefully, the statement is actually quite radical perhaps unintentionally so. The brief message just two short paragraphs draws no distinction between the moral duties of Catholic policymakers and Catholic judges to work against abortion.
As a lifelong Catholic, Pelosi could not feign surprise at being called upon by the Church to use her gift for persuasion to restrict abortion legislatively, or at least not to be its advocate. But until now, the Church had not formally instructed judges in a similar fashion. As written, the Pope's statement has the potential, at least theoretically, to empty the U.S. Supreme Court of all five of its Catholic jurists and perhaps all other Catholics who sit on the bench in the lower federal and state courts."
"... giuristia is not the word an Italian author would use when referring to a judge. He would use giudice. A giurista is someone who attends to he law as a matter of profession, most frequently a lawyer, or a professor of law. But a giudice is a magistrate who evaluates the merits of an argument in a case or controversy.
In American law, distinctions between words carry great significance; and in Vatican press releases, the spokesmen for the Holy See select their words very carefully. In this instance, the press office elected to use the more vague term giuristi rather than the specific term giudici. However, Kmiec misses this critical distinction."
Great post, thanks.
The servant of Satan Kmiec is still looking for his payoff from his earthly master, the anti-Christ Obama.
Kmiec is not the only one. In any case, anyone who looks at government must understand that executive, legislative , and judicial powers overlap. The president makes law, the Congress makes law, and the Judiciary makes law. Therefore, what is true of one is true of another so far as they have the common duty of governing public affairs,
Catholic theologians and pastors are looking at ways of keeping our voice in the public square. This is a major component of Pope Benedicts vision for his pontificate. He is trying to revitalize Catholic identity so that within the Church we know who we are and what we believe so that to the outside we have something worth while to say and contribute in the public square.
Kmiecs article is set against this vision: Catholic teaching matters for Catholics, but it shouldnt bind Catholics in public discourse.
What Kmiec is really saying (as he proceeds from a false reading of the Holy Sees statement) is that if the Pope said what he said, then once your Catholic faith impedes you from reaching compromises with people who dont share your religious views, you can no longer meaningfully participate in public life....
Kmiec fogs this distinction and tried to make the Pope look like an extremist. Savvy Catholics, like Kmiec and Pelosi and Kerry and Kennedy and Cuomo and Sebelius and Granholm and Dodd and Biden, etc., must set aside the urgings of extremists and filter out the interpretations of hard-liners in order to save their version of the Churchs message in the public square.
That is his true agenda.
Needs to be in sack cloth and ashes.
In addition, he needs prayer, as do all the other usual suspects.
I pray the caplet of Divine mercy and leave it to God to decide who needs it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.