Posted on 04/26/2004 8:33:57 AM PDT by presidio9
Will Edward Cardinal Egan try to block Sen. John Kerry from the 59th Alfred E. Smith Dinner? The annual gathering, sponsored by the Archdiocese of New York, isn't until October, but organizers are already said to be worrying about whether Egan may take a hard-line against the Democratic candidate because he supports abortion rights. Friday, the Vatican's Francis Cardinal Arinze said a Catholic politician who supports abortion rights "is not fit" to receive Holy Communion. Bishop Raymond Burke of St. Louis, for one, has said he would refuse Kerry Communion.
Last week, we hear, members of the Al Smith Foundation met to discuss what to do if Egan takes a similar position, or tries to bar Kerry from the dinner, named for New York Gov. Al Smith, who ran for President in 1928 against Herbert Hoover.
"They're concerned that Egan may do something to win favor with the Pope," says a source. "Some people were nervous that the Cardinal wouldn't recognize a Catholic who is pro-choice."
Archdiocese spokesman Joseph Zwilling said Egan was traveling in Europe but told us, "I haven't heard any discussion about John Kerry and the Al Smith dinner."
A message left with foundation member Alfred Smith 4th wasn't immediately returned.
While not quite a sacrament, the Smith dinner has become an important ritual for pols, who don white tie and tails in final weeks before the election. Candidates George W. Bush and Al Gore both attended it 2000.
How can enforcing one of the fundamental teachings of the church be twisted into a move to curry favor? If he granted him access would they call that a move to curry favor with the left wing of the church? - I doubt it.
Family Life/Respect Life
1011 First Avenue
New York NY 10022
212-371-1000 x3185
According to Domenico Bettinelli's blog (he provides no link),
Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, a practicing Catholic, issued a press release rebuttal to John Kerry's assertion on Friday that religion should not enter the public square and has no place in political policymaking.
I am astonished that Senator Kerry would suggest that religion does not have a role in public life when the very history of the United States is deeply rooted in religion.
The Founding Fathers risked their lives to establish freedom of worship in our country. Religion and moral law motivated the abolitionists to combat slavery. Civil rights principals felt so strongly about their faith that they organized themselves under the banner of the "Southern Christian Leadership Council" in the 1960s.
In view of our country’s Founders and the great moral warriors who fought slavery and racism, religion is much more than a nonissue - it is essential to the success of the American experiment. In fact, religion has inspired, informed and motivated men and women to the benefit of all.
I call on Senator Kerry to clarify or retract his statement and affirm the great tradition of religious pluralism which has been the soul of this country’s strength and one of the great contributions of the American experiment to the world.
Kerry's position is exactly that of most liberals today. Religion, especially of the conservative kind, is destructive, benighting, and dangerous, if not just a general nuisance. If only they could marginalize religion, push it to the sidelines, get rid of it, then a new moral authority could rise up, one based solely on personal preference and political ideology, preferably their own. But as Santorum reminds us, religion, especially Christianity, is a vital cornerstone of American society and political philosophy and if we try to remove it we endanger the whole structure.
I may well be in the minority on this on FR, but I think Kerry should be allowed to speak. I remember when Al Gore and GWB spoke at the 2000 dinner. GWB got a huge standing ovation for mentioning a respect for life. I believe he would again. I also believe Kerry would fall flat on his face. He's got even less personality than Al Gore.
I wouldn't recommend that the Cardinal act like Hillary Clinton during Kerry's speech, but enthusiastic applause for GWB only would speak volumes.
A little bit of political correctness run amok IMHO.
It scares me to think how such a man would act at the Al Smith dinner. But I think I see now why the issue has come up - it's that Egan has been less than a friend to pro-lifers and he is being called to task on everything.
I'm curious if everyone else thinks Egan should cancel Kerry? I'm not sure Egan even has authority to cancel him. Perhaps Egan should cancel himself - which, of course, will never happen. Egan would not pass up the opportunity to hobnob with the really rich Catholics who attend the Al Smith dinner.
That's just the way I sees it, I do....
That would sit very well with me.
Ever the politician it seems.
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.