Colorado, OCT. 17, 2008 (Zenit.org).-
Archbishop Charles Chaput says
Catholic legal scholar Douglas
Kmiec "couldn't be more
mistaken" in comparing
his own moral reasoning regarding
the 2008 presidential election
to that of the archbishop.
Chaput said this tonight at
a dinner sponsored by ENDOW
(Educating on the Nature and
Dignity of Women). The talk,
which he said reflects his own
opinion as a private citizen,
is titled "Little Murders."
prelate spoke at length of Douglas
Kmiec’s book "Can
a Catholic Support Him? Asking
the Big Question about Barack
Obama," in which the Pepperdine
law professor argues why Catholics
should cast their vote in November's
presidential election for Senator
publicly endorsed the Democratic
candidate earlier this year,
stating in an article for Slate
that Obama is a "natural"
for Catholic voters.
Chaput noted that his own book,
"Render Unto Caesar,"
was heavily cited by Kmiec in
his defense of Obama: "In
fact, he suggests that his reasoning
and mine are 'not far distant
on the moral inquiry necessary
in the election of 2008.'"
he either misunderstands or
misuses my words, and he couldn’t
be more mistaken," said
believe that Senator Obama,
whatever his other talents,
is the most committed 'abortion-rights'
presidential candidate of either
major party since the Roe v.
Wade abortion decision in 1973,"
he added. "Despite what
[...] Kmiec suggests, the party
platform Senator Obama runs
on this year is not only aggressively
'pro-choice;' it has also removed
any suggestion that killing
an unborn child might be a regrettable
prelate affirmed that the
platform of the Democratic Party
that emerged from its national
convention in August "is
argues that there are defensible
motives to support Senator Obama,"
continued Archbishop Chaput.
"Speaking for myself, I
do not know any proportionate
reason that could outweigh more
than 40 million unborn children
killed by abortion and the many
millions of women deeply wounded
by the loss and regret abortion
prelate continued: "To
suggest -- as some Catholics
do -- that Senator Obama is
this year’s 'real' pro-life
candidate requires a peculiar
kind of self-hypnosis, or moral
confusion, or worse.
portray the 2008 Democratic
Party presidential ticket as
the preferred 'pro-life' option
is to subvert what the word
Chaput said he thought Kmiec's
endorsement of Obama has "done
a disservice to the Church,
confused the natural priorities
of Catholic social teaching,
undermined the progress pro-lifers
have made, and provided an excuse
for some Catholics to abandon
the abortion issue instead of
fighting within their parties
and at the ballot box to protect
truth is that for some Catholics,
the abortion issue has never
been a comfortable cause,"
said the Denver prelate. "It’s
embarrassing. It’s not
the kind of social justice they
like to talk about. It interferes
with their natural political
because the homicides involved
in abortion are 'little murders'
-- the kind of private, legally
protected murders that kill
conveniently unseen lives --
it’s easy to look the
archbishop called it "wrong
and often dishonest [...] to
neutralize the witness of bishops
and the pro-life movement by
offering a 'Catholic' alternative
to the Church’s priority
on sanctity of life issues."
I suggest throughout 'Render
Unto Caesar,' it’s important
for Catholics to be people of
faith who pursue politics to
achieve justice; not people
of politics who use and misuse
faith to achieve power,"
Chaput lamented that for 35
years he's watched the pro-abortion
lobby fight tooth-and-nail against
the pro-life movement: "Apparently
they believe in their convictions
more than some of us Catholics
believe in ours. And I think
that’s an indictment of
an entire generation of American
prelate continued by affirming
that being pro-life is much
deeper than looking to overturn
Roe v. Wade, or being a "single
issue" voter: "The
cornerstone of Catholic social
teaching is protecting human
life from conception to natural
death. [...] Every other human
right depends on the right to
added: "So I think that
people who claim that the abortion
struggle is 'lost' as a matter
of law, or that supporting an
outspoken defender of legal
abortion is somehow 'pro-life,'
are not just wrong; they’re
betraying the witness of every
person who continues the work
of defending the unborn child.
I hope they know how to explain
that, because someday they’ll
be required to."