Father Pavone vs. Father McBrien

[Ash Wednesday]

Did anyone catch Father Pavone vs. Father McBrien on O'Reilly?
It was the "is voting pro-choice a sin" debate. We've hashed that out here on PM of course but it was interesting to see it on cable.

Father McBrien cited the U.S. Bishops, and Ratzinger's memo (out of context...) and you had Father Pavone calling Fr. McBrien on not being clear about "proportionate reason" of what Ratzinger was talking about with the pro-choice vote, and asking what proportionate reason is there to justify the murder of millions of innocents.

I kinda felt like it was a lot of babbling and arguing, and I felt that Father Pavone should have been allowed to speak more. But I was on his side, of course.

I have to admit it was funny seeing O'Reilly and two babbling and debating priests on the Factor. What was so funny was how O'Reilly looked kinda sheepish at times, like, "Uh oh, I better be careful... I don't want two priests fighting each other on my show"

[StMichael]

I found the segment horrible.

One is an actual priest and the other a theologian.

Part of the problem with some priests is their views are far too liberal (those who seem to have become priests the decade after Vactican II) and in the case of theologians, question the divine authority.

It was a very weak display of those heading our Church here in the states.

Father Pavone made it clear while Father McBrien added to the confusion.

It was a very sorry segment.

[XIX]

I think where Father Pavone really scored some points ws whenhe quoted the abortionists who call abortion "dismemberment, killing, baby, etc."

Then O'Reilly said "well, partial birth abortion, right?"

Pavone: "No, D&E" (dilation and extraction)

I think the segment was all right. I mean, it was better than, say, if nobody talked about it at all.

[Ash Wednesday]

[quote name='XIX' date='Oct 14 2004, 11:34 AM'] I think where Father Pavone really scored some points ws whenhe quoted the abortionists who call abortion "dismemberment, killing, baby, etc."

Then O'Reilly said "well, partial birth abortion, right?"

Pavone: "No, D&E" (dilation and extraction)

I think the segment was all right. I mean, it was better than, say, if nobody talked about it at all. [/quote]
I agree, XIX. It was compelling to hear Fr. Pavone ask what the proportionate reason was to allow dismemberment and crushing of heads of countless innocent children.

[Lil Red]

i wish i could've seen it!

[ironmonk]

Here it is...
Fr. McBrien is either grossly wrong or a liar.

[url="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,135463,00.html"]http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,135463,00.html[/url]

[b]Is it a Sin for Catholics to Vote for Senator Kerry?[/b]


This is a partial transcript from "The O'Reilly Factor," Oct. 13, 2004, that has been edited for clarity.

Watch "The O'Reilly Factor" weeknights at 8 p.m. and 11 p.m. ET and listen to the "Radio Factor!"

BILL O'REILLY, HOST: In the "Unresolved Problem" segment tonight, the archbishop of Denver Charles Chaput (search) says Roman Catholics should not support politicians who support abortion rights.

Says the archbishop, "If you vote this way, are you cooperating in evil? And if you know you are cooperating in evil, should you go to confession? The answer is yes."

Joining us now from South Bend, Indiana, is Father Richard McBrien who teaches theology at Notre Dame (search), and, here in the studio, Father Frank Pavone, the national director for Priests for Life (search).

I do want to give the archbishop in Denver a break here because he did say some other things, and I want to put it in context. He goes, "The reason I want to stress that," what he just said up on the screen, "is because it's not like bishops are issuing edicts about who you should vote for. It's issuing statements about how a Catholic forms her conscience or his conscience."

So do you see a problem with the archbishop making a strong statement that was taken by most press people and compacted. They didn't do what I do and read, you know -- he's advising Catholics on conscience rather than who to vote for, I think, is apparent.

FATHER FRANK PAVONE, PRIESTS FOR LIFE: Which is exactly what I've been doing for years as well.

O'REILLY: Right. And it's legitimate that he do that.

PAVONE: Exactly.

O'REILLY: However, it can be misconstrued as an endorsement for President Bush, can it not?

PAVONE: Well, there's nothing with people coming to conclusions. WE want to help form people's consciences, and, if they come to the conclusion, well, this means I have to vote for the president or I have to vote against somebody else, that's the -- that's their responsibility as voters.

We respect the conscience of each American voter.

O'REILLY: But you...

PAVONE: Part of respecting the conscience is informing the conscience.

O'REILLY: OK, but, Father, you must be deluged with questions from people like me who say, you know, I might want to vote for John Kerry. Am I doing anything wrong? What will you say?

PAVONE: Well, here's how I frame the response. You know, this past spring, Bill, there were court trials held across the country in which doctors who perform abortions took the stand and testified under oath to what they do.

Now they used the words, not me, not the Vatican, not the arch bishop, but they used the words "dismemberment," "decapitation," "crushing the head of a baby," "inserting poison in"...

O'REILLY: This is partial birth.

PAVONE: No, no. These were -- these were testimonies on the D&E procedure and other pro...

O'REILLY: All right.

PAVONE: They were testifying about all the procedures. Now that's how we have to start answering this question.

O'REILLY: But you're dodging the question.

PAVONE: What is an abortion? No, no. We're answering it because the question of whether or not it's a sin to elect somebody who says this should remain legal has to begin by understanding what "this," namely abortion, really is.

O'REILLY: All right, but you're still...

PAVONE: People...

O'REILLY: You're giving them a philosophy lecture, not an answer to the question.

PAVONE: No, no. We're answering the question with our question. The answer to the question is: Do you want to elect somebody...

O'REILLY: No, I...

PAVONE: ... who's going to...

O'REILLY: ... want to know -- and this is a hypothetical. I'm not saying I'm voting for Kerry. So don't give me any of that. But I want an -- can you give me an answer, Father McBrien.

FATHER RICHARD MCBRIEN, UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME: Are you asking me if I -- one can vote for Senator Kerry?

O'REILLY: No, no. Look -- Look, I'm a student in Notre Dame. I'm coming over to you. You're the theology pooh-bah. You know everything about God. You know him personally. And I say, you know, I'm thinking about voting for John Kerry, but I'm hearing the archbishop and I'm confused. I don't want to do anything immoral. What do you say to me.

MCBRIEN: Well, first -- first of all, I'd ask if they were from Denver because the archbishop's authority is limited to his own archdiocese of Denver.

O'REILLY: So it's a sin in Denver, but it's not a sin in Pennsylvania?

MCBRIEN: Well, listen to me. The American Catholic Bishops as a body do not follow the approach that's been taken by the archbishops of Denver, St. Louis and Newark and some other bishops of smaller diocese.

They have made it very plain ever since 1988, the 1988 campaign when Bush -- President Bush's father was a candidate against Governor Dukakis of Massachusetts, that they do not presume to instruct anyone on how to vote by endorsing or opposing candidates.

Now the reason they added the words "or opposing" and they are still in every one of their quadrennial statements ever since 1988, is because in the '84 campaign -- the reelection campaign of President Reagan, Cardinal O'Connor of New York, Cardinal Law of Boston and other bishops were so strong in their opposition to the Mondale-Ferraro ticket, that it was clear to many people that they were, in effect, indirectly endorsing President Reagan.

O'REILLY: All right. So...

MCBRIEN: So the bishops added the words "or opposing" in 1988.

O'REILLY: I got it, I got it, but both of you guys are not serving me as a confused parishioner. I want to do the right thing in this election, and I think most Americans do want to do the right thing in the election, and we come to men like you, Father Pavone and Father McBrien. and we say, you know, I know this is a big church issue. I know it's a big moral issue. But can I in good conscience take the other issues...

MCBRIEN: May...

O'REILLY: Go ahead.

MCBRIEN: May I answer that?

O'REILLY: Sure you can.

MCBRIEN: I'll take the position which may seem strange to some of my critics out there -- I'll take the position taken by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger who is the head of the congregation for the doctrine of the faith in the Vatican, and he sent -- he had a paragraph in a memorandum he sent to the bishops June, and the paragraph is led off by the initials "NB," which in Latin means nota bene, note this very well.

He said if a Catholic were to vote for a pro-choice candidate precisely because of that candidate's support of abortion, not abortion rights, but abortion as such, then it would be wrong.

O'REILLY: Right.

MCBRIEN: But he said if someone votes for a candidate for other reasons well, taking other issues into account as the American Catholic Bishops say they should, we should put everything in a consistent ethic-of- life framework, they said, then it would not be a sin to vote for...

O'REILLY: OK. So -- and then now I'm starting to understand.

Go ahead, Father.

PAVONE: Father McBrien, are you forgetting the word "proportionate"?

MCBRIEN: No. In fact -- in fact, Ratzinger...

PAVONE: Then how come you didn't mention it?

MCBRIEN: Ratzinger used the word. I've just written a poem about this.

PAVONE: But you didn't. Listen, you're misleading this audience. The cardinal said that one can vote...

MCBRIEN: I'm glad you're not.

PAVONE: The cardinal said -- he used the words "for proportionate reasons." Now I ask Father McBrien, I ask our viewers what is proportionate to 3,500...

MCBRIEN: Well, let me give you...

O'REILLY: Who, whoa, whoa. Let him finish, Father. I'll give you time.

MCBRIEN: ... 3,500 innocent children being deliberately destroyed, not my words, but the words of these abortionists, heads being crushed, arms and legs being torn off.

O'REILLY: All right. So you put it at the head of the list.

PAVONE: There's nothing more proportionate.

O'REILLY: OK. I got it.

PAVONE: Now that -- we don't need a Vatican cardinal to tell us about that.

O'REILLY: I got it. I got it.

Go ahead, Father McBrien. Go ahead.

MCBRIEN: Father Pavone and I agree, I think, on the teaching of the church regarding abortion. But I also -- but I don't know if Father Pavone agrees with the teachings of our bishops that we have to follow a consistent ethic of life. The proportionate reasons would involve taking other life issues in account.

I have here the statement of the bishop -- that Pope John Paul II himself gave to the Vatican diplomatic corps in January of 2003, and he said, "War itself," war itself, "is an attack on human life since it brings in its wake suffering and deaths. The battle for peace is always a battle for life."

The proportionate reasons would be that you're looking at a candidate and trying to see what that candidate's views and policies are on a broad range of life issues...

O'REILLY: I got it.

MCBRIEN: ... including, for example, the war in Iraq.

O'REILLY: All right. So we're all back to where we started again.

MCBRIEN: It's a judgment call.

O'REILLY: That means that everybody's got to vote their conscience.

MCBRIEN: Absolutely.

[b]PAVONE: No, they may not. The bishops and the pope have said that abortion trumps the other issues because it...[/b]

O'REILLY: All right.

[color=red][b]MCBRIEN: They have never said that. They have never said that.[/b][/color] [b][color=blue](MAX: This is where he is wrong or he lied, they have said that)[/color][/b]

PAVONE: They certainly have.

O'REILLY: All right. I don't want you guys to duke it out.

MCBRIEN: Listen, Bill, this is not...

PAVONE: Bill, it would be a sin, I believe. I would...

MCBRIEN: This is not a card game. There's no trump card.

O'REILLY: OK.

PAVONE: I would consider it a sin for me to vote for Kerry.

O'REILLY: All right.

MCBRIEN: This is not a -- well, that's fine.

O'REILLY: And you're entitled to it. I think -- all right. It was a very interesting discussion, and I'll let the folks decide because I'll just get into a lot of trouble.

Gentlemen, thanks very much. Very, very good discussion.


-----------------------------------




God Bless,
ironmonk

Edited October 15, 2004 by ironmonk

[XIX]

Oh my goodness, you're right. I will pray for McBrien's soul. What he did was objectively wrong, either as a horrible mistake or a horrible sin.

[ironmonk]

[quote name='XIX' date='Oct 15 2004, 12:30 PM'] Oh my goodness, you're right. I will pray for McBrien's soul. What he did was objectively wrong, either as a horrible mistake or a horrible sin. [/quote]
His whole argument lies on them saying that... so it just proves to anyone that knows that they said that, or that has any sense, that it is a sin to vote for anyone who is pro-abortion when running against someone who is pro-life.


God Bless,
ironmonk

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[Lil Red]

wow, this just strikes home to me how much more we need to pray for our religious! how happy Satan must be when he leads one of them astray!

Prayer for Parish Priests by Saint John Vianney
Dear Saint John Vianney, your childhood dream was to be a Priest, to win souls for God. You endured years of toil and humiliation to attain the Priesthood. You became a Priest truly after God's own heart, outstanding in humulity and poverty; prayer and mortification. Totally devoted to the service of God's people. The Church has exalted you as model and patron saint of all Parish Priest, trusting that your example and prayers will help them to live up to the high dignity of their vocation to be faithful servants of God's people, to be perfect imitators of Christ the Savior Who came not to be served but to serve, to give His Life in ransom for many.

Pray that God may give to His Church today many more Priests after His own Heart. Pray for all the Priests under your patronage, that they may be worthy representatives of Christ the Good Shepherd. May they wholeheartedly devote themselves to prayer and penance; be examples of humility and poverty; shining modelss of holiness; tireless and powerful preachers of the Word of God; zealous dispensers of God's Grace in the Sacraments. May their loving devotion to Jesus in the Eucharist and to Mary His Mother be the Twin Fountains of fruitfulness for their ministry. Amen.


A PRAYER FOR PRIESTS
John Cardinal O'Connor

Lord Jesus, we your people pray to You for our priests. You have given them to us for OUR needs. We pray for them in THEIR needs.

We know that You have made them priests in the likeness of your own priesthood. You have consecrated them, set them aside, annointed them, filled them with the Holy Spirit, appointed them to teach, to preach, to minister, to console, to forgive, and to feed us with Your Body and Blood.

Yet we know, too, that they are one with us and share our human weaknesses. We know too that they are tempted to sin and discouragement as are we, needing to be ministered to, as do we, to be consoled and forgiven, as do we. Indeed, we thank You for choosing them from among us, so that they understand us as we understand them, suffer with us and rejoice with us, worry with us and trust with us, share our beings, our lives, our faith.

We ask that You give them this day the gift You gave Your chosen ones on the way to Emmaus: Your presence in their hearts, Your holiness in their souls, Your joy in their spirits. And let them see You face to face in the breaking of the Eucharistic bread.

We pray to You, O Lord, through Mary the mother of all priests, for Your priests and for ours. Amen.


Prayer for Priests

O Jesus, our great High Priest,
Hear my humble prayers on behalf of your priest, Father [N].

Give him a deep faith
a bright and firm hope
and a burning love
which will ever increase
in the course of his priestly life.

In his loneliness, comfort him
In his sorrows, strengthen him
In his frustrations, point out to him
that it is through suffering that the soul is purified,
and show him that he is needed by the Church,
he is needed by souls,
he is needed for the work of redemption.

O loving Mother Mary, Mother of Priests,
take to your heart your son who is close to you
because of his priestly ordination,
and because of the power which he has received
to carry on the work of Christ
in a world which needs him so much.

Be his comfort, be his joy, be his strength,
and especially help him
to live and to defend the ideals of consecrated celibacy. Amen.

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

I thought Fr. Pavone knew what he was talking about, cited sources correctly, and knew the Church's teaching on the matter. Fr. McBrien (a frequent religious correspondent for O'Reilly) just confused people and spouted out misinterpretations rendering the entire segment of the show useless. People don't want to see priests argue over Church teaching.

[Ash Wednesday]

Thanks for posting the transcripts.

By the way I didn't mean to imply that the segment was funny -- I just found O'Reilly's sheepishness amusing, that's all.


The subject matter and the spin was not funny at all.

[ironmonk]

[quote name='Ash Wednesday' date='Oct 15 2004, 05:26 PM'] Thanks for posting the transcripts.

By the way I didn't mean to imply that the segment was funny -- I just found O'Reilly's sheepishness amusing, that's all.


The subject matter and the spin was not funny at all. [/quote]
O'Reilly claims to be Catholic, but he's a very uninformed Catholic... The time I saw him attacking the Church over the blown-up-out-of-proportion scandal with the Priests, was when I lost respect for him and question his views as unresearched - if not just lazy.



God Bless,
ironmonk

[JP2Iloveyou]

I found it appalling. I didn't see the segment but I read the transcript. It was quite simply scandalous. To be honest, you can never get a feel for what really happened with a transcript because it is impossible to show who interrupted whom and when. However, just judging from the transcript, I fault both of them. I love Fr. Frank Pavone, he is one of my heroes, but I didn't think he spoke up enough when Fr. McBrien started to deny Catholic teaching. Now on to Fr. McBrien. I have to be very careful here, because this man, regardless of what anyone thinks of him, is an ordained man with an indelible mark of that ordination on his soul forever. He is truly and fully one of God's priest. Now, that being said, what he said was completely scandalous. A couple of points.

1. It is true that Archbishop Chaput's jurisdiction if you want to call it that extends only to the Archdiocese of Denver, however, His Excellency was speaking on the moral law which is binding on all, not a particular canonical adaptation, such as dispensing Catholics from abstaining from meat on Friday in lieu of another penance. So, in that respect, Fr. McBrien was just plain wrong and he knows it.

2. I believe our Lord had some pretty harsh words to say to someone like this. I think it was something along the lines of, "Woe to the man who leads one of my little ones astray. It would be better for that man if a great millstone were hung around his neck and he were cast into the sea." Fr. McBrien not only MISQUOTED His Emminence Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger (I had Mass with him the other day BTW. It was awesome!), he took the quote out of context, AND distorted its meaning.

Let me say very clearly for anyone who may still be in doubt. IT IS A SIN TO VOTE FOR SOMEONE WHO IS NOT IN LINE WITH THE TEACHINGS OF THE CHURCH ON THE FIVE UNCOMPROMISABLE "ISSUES:" ABORTION, EMBRYONIC STEM-CELL RESEARCH, HOMOSEXUAL "MARRIAGE," HUMAN CLONING, AND EUTHANASIA. If a candidate supports any of these, unless there is a PROPORTIONATE reason to do so, it is a sin to vote for that person. Period. Notice that the death penalty, war, taxes, fighting poverty, etc. are not on there. That is because the Church teaches that Catholics can legitimately disagree on these issues.

Now, the question is, which Fr. McBrien failed to answer, is what is a PROPORTIONATE reason? The five uncompromisables are intrinsically evil actions, meaning that there is NEVER a case in which they can be justified. They are always wrong. Therefore, for someone to vote for someone who supports these things, his opponent must support one or more of them to a greater degree. When something is infinitely wrong, no amount of noninfinitely wrong actions can add up to equal a proportionate reason to vote for someone supporting something intrinsically evil.

Let's use two examples. First, realy life. Senator John F. Kerry has made it quite clear that he supports abortion, euthanasia, stem-cell research, and cloning. He has said he thinks that marriage should be between a man and a woman, but he would not support a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. President George W. Bush is opposed to abortion in most cases, opposed to euthanasia, opposed to cloning, and supports limited funding for stem-cell research. He also has made it quite clear that he opposes gay marriage and supports a constitutional amendment ensuring marriage will remain between a man and a woman.

Here, it is clear that Sen. Kerry supports things that are intrinsically evil. President Bush does as well by supporting the funding, albeit limited, of stem-cell research. Therefore, a Catholic cannnot in good conscience vote for either of them right? Wrong. Precisely because of the fact that Sen. Kerry supports more intrinsically wrong things and at a higher rate than President Bush, that gives a proportionate reason to vote for President Bush. A Catholic CANNOT in good conscience vote for John Kerry. He or she may, however, vote for President Bush.

Let's apply the above situation to a different issue though. Suppose both candidates, Kerry and Bush, had the exact same issue stances. However, imagine that it is 1860 and Sen. Kerry instead of supporting abortion on demand, he supports slavery on demand. After all, yes, he is a Catholic, and yes, the Catholic Church does condemn slavery, but, he can't impose his morality on others. So, everything is the same, except that Sen. Kerry supports slavery and President Bush does not. Now, on top of that, Sen. Kerry justifies his support for slavery saying that his economic policies will actually help more minorities escape the poverty that enslaves them in the first place and that if Bush is elected, his economic policies will only lead to more black people being enslaved.

The Civil War is getting ready to get started and Sen. Kerry is firmly opposed saying that President Bush and his policies of war-mongering wthout talking to the South will lead to more Americans getting killed and ending slavery is not worth going to war over. Instead, he thinks it would be a much better approach to let the Southern slave trade go unchecked for the time being and try to work out a deal with President Jefferson Davis. In the meantime, he is going to seek a diplomatic solution by sending a representative to France to discuss with the French how they handled the French Revolution.

This situation is laughable absurd. Sadly, we have to many people in this country that are so utterly blinded by emotion that they refuse to think about these issues.

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

FYI: I just found out that Fr. McBrien is a well-known dissenter who supports women's ordination, lifting Church teaching on contraception, Call to Action, and served as an advisor during the founding of Voice of the Faithful. It's too bad this guy oversees Notre Dame's theology department and is put on TV as a "theologian". If I join CSC, I'de like to unseat him.