Posted on 05/19/2005 6:03:54 AM PDT by icwhatudo
Cardinal William H. Keeler told Loyola College of Maryland yesterday that he will not attend its commencement ceremony tomorrow because he disagrees with the keynote speaker, former New York Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, who supports abortion rights.
The decision comes amid planned protests, led in part by a conservative Catholic group, outside tomorrow's ceremony at the 1st Mariner Arena in downtown Baltimore.
Loyola's interim president, David Haddad, received a strongly worded letter from the cardinal yesterday, saying Keeler would not attend - nor would any auxiliary bishops or any other representative of the archdiocese, college and archdiocese officials said.
"He just feels it's not appropriate given Giuliani's stance on abortion," archdiocese spokesman Sean Caine said. "I don't recall there being similar circumstances where the cardinal's had to make this decision."
(Excerpt) Read more at baltimoresun.com ...
Mod please delete-duplicate.
(Yes I did do a search-ugh)
Why because of his stance on abortion? Giuliani supports the war in Iraq, which the Vatican does not.
Are you equating abortion with the war in Iraq?????
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1406132/posts?page=124
Not sure what I did wrong, I searched under Cardinal, Loyola, Keeler and got no hits-found it by luck.
Good, I am pro life before anything else. Being Catholic means following the faith not a party.
You know very well why.
Giuliani supports the war in Iraq, which the Vatican does not.
The Pope has specifically stated that he supports the continued presence of US troops in Iraq.
Pay attention.
The Vatican "doesn't like" war, "doesn't like" capital punishment, as a rule, but admits that under certain circumstances each may be necessary. But it CONDEMNS as NEVER necessary, NEVER permissable, abortion, euthanasia, etc.
It was bandied around by the MSM that the Pope was "against" the war, but I don't believe he ever said that definitively. I believe it was more a statement of war as a LAST resort.
The AP wire story has a completely different title, which does not contain any of the words that I searched for - guess the same thing happened to you. Oh, well... Fertilizer occurs ;-)
One would think his multiple divorces alone would be enough to keep him off the speakers list.
Sounds fair to me!
The Pope spoke out against the war in the days leading up to it and after the start of the war itself. He didn't hedge at all.
That would be direct abortion.
According to the CCC it was President George W. Bush's (and the U.S. Congress which gave him the support) moral responsibility to determine if a war was just or not with regards to protecting the USA. W and the Congress saw Afghanistan and Iraq as threats to not only the United States but also civilization itself.
CCC 2309
The strict conditions for legitimate defense by military force require rigorous consideration. The gravity of such a decision makes it subject to rigorous conditions of moral legitimacy. At one and the same time:
- the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;
- all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;
- there must be serious prospects of success;
- the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power of modern means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.
These are the traditional elements enumerated in what is called the "just war" doctrine. The evaluation of these conditions for moral legitimacy belongs to the prudential judgment of those who have responsibility for the common good.
i.e. the U.S. Government in regards to protecting the USA.
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.