Topic category: Secession - Formation of a New Constitutional Republic
Raymond Arroyo Exposes the Ted Kennedy-as-Devout-Catholic Myth
People who watched Senator Kennedy's wake, funeral Mass and burial were deliberately led to believe that Senator Kennedy was a devout Catholic, not a Catholic deviate.
The late Ted Kennedy may have been a devout liberal, but he was not a devout Catholic.
In the early 1970's He abandoned a fundamental tenet of the Roman Catholic faith: that human life must be protected from conception and public servants are bound to protect it.
Planned Parenthood was pleased, but God was not.
It might have been politic or politically correct, but it was anti-life and anti-Catholic.
Yet people who watched Senator Kennedy's wake, funeral Mass and burial were deliberately led to believe that Senator Kennedy was a devout Catholic, not a Catholic deviate.
Raymond Arroyo, News Director of the Eternal Word Television Network and Mother Angelica biographer, not only was not fooled, but compellingly called attention to the con game in an awesome article titled "TED KENNEDY: THE CATHOLIC LEGACY AND THE LETTERS" and dated August 31, 2009.
Arroyo: "What most in the media and the public fail to recognize is that this entire spectacle—the Catholic funeral trappings and the wall to wall coverage-- was only partially about Ted Kennedy. It was truly about cementing the impression, indeed catechizing the faithful, that one can be a Catholic politician, and so long as you claim to care about the poor, you may licitly ignore the cause of life. The 'Common Ground' argument was reinforced this weekend—the notion that supporting a host of 'social justice' initiatives somehow cancels out or trumps the 'grave',
'intrinsic' evil of abortion and the Catholic commitment to the life issues. As the Pope has described in his letter of 2004, and subsequently, this is an untenable position no matter how many 'pro-choice' Catholics on the right or the left attempt to make it."
It's not surprising that Cardinal Theodore McCarrick played a key role in the attempted deception.
As I wrote in "Under Canon law..." in 2004:
"Sadly, led by Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, the most prominent Catholic clergyman in the United States, many (but not all) United States priests have continued to give Communion to such persons. Cardinal McCarrick publicly proclaimed that he has 'not gotten to the stage where I’m comfortable in denying the Eucharist.'
"In 1995 then Archbishop of Newark McCarrick seemed comfortable with the concept of obeying canon law. He issued a soundly reasoned, elegantly written pastoral letter on penance. The kind of letter than indicated a promotion to Cardinal was in order.
"Cardinal McCarrick rightly wrote in that letter: 'We know that anyone who is aware of having committed a grave sin may not receive Holy Communion, even if he or she experiences deep contrition, without having first received absolution in the Sacrament of Penance [footnote citing Canon 916]. This is true unless the person has a grave reason for receiving Communion and there is no possibility of going to confession, a situation which does not apply in the area of the Archdiocese of Newark.
"Canon 916 states: 'A person who is conscious of grave sin is not to celebrate Mass or to receive the Body of the Lord without prior sacramental confession unless a grave reason is present and there is no opportunity of confessing; in this case the person is to be mindful of the obligation to make an act of perfect contrition, including the intention of confessing as soon as possible.'
"Obviously pro-abortion nominally Catholic politicians such as Senators Kerry, Kennedy, Daschle, Durbin and Collins, House Minority Leader Pelosi and former Mayor Guiliani can confess if they choose.
"Significantly, Cardinal McCarrick faithfully noted in his letter that abortion is a 'grave' sin and a 'crime against innocent life.' He asserted, perhaps too generously, that '[w]e all recognize that it is a grave evil to take an innocent human life' and astutely observed that '[w]e tend to find excuses.'
"Sadly, Cardinal McCarrick has found an excuse for the sin of disregarding Canon 915 and knowingly giving Communion to pro-abortion nominally Catholic politicans: uncomfortableness."
Arroyo: "At the gravesite of Senator Edward Kennedy on Saturday, Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, the former Archbishop of Washington, shared a private letter that the deceased Senator wrote to the Pope. The Cardinal also read what he described as a response from the Pontiff. This marvelous bit of political theatre (as so much of Senator Kennedy’s funeral was), should not escape attention. That moment in particular revealed a great deal."
A great deal about Senator Kennedy, Cardinal McCarrick and politics and religion in America.
"First of all, it must be recalled that Cardinal McCarrick has a rather unfortunate history involving the delivery of letters, particularly those from a certain Vatican official by the name of Ratzinger. In 2004, when the Bishops of the US were anguishing over whether to allow communion to Catholic politicians who support abortion laws, Cardinal McCarrick concealed a letter from his brother bishops. The missive was from the head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, then Cardinal (now Pope) Joseph Ratzinger. Had the bishops received the letter intended to help guide their debate, things might have gone very differently. The contents of that letter are still relevant, particularly now when dissenting Catholics have made grandiose pronouncements about what it means to be a Catholic in public life. Below are some excerpts:
'Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia.
Regarding the grave sin of abortion or euthanasia, when a person’s formal cooperation becomes manifest (understood, in the case of a Catholic politician, as his consistently campaigning and voting for permissive abortion and euthanasia laws), his Pastor should meet with him, instructing him about the Church’s teaching, informing him that he is not to present himself for Holy Communion until he brings to an end the objective situation of sin, and warning him that he will otherwise be denied the Eucharist. When "these precautionary measures have not had their effect or in which they were not possible," and the person in question, with obstinate persistence, still presents himself to receive the Holy Eucharist, "the minister of Holy Communion must refuse to distribute it" (cf. Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts Declaration "Holy Communion and Divorced, Civilly Remarried Catholics" , nos. 3-4). This decision, properly speaking, is not a sanction or a penalty. Nor is the minister of Holy Communion passing judgment on the person’s subjective guilt, but rather is reacting to the person’s public unworthiness to receive Holy Communion due to an objective situation of sin.'"
Arroyo emphasized the confusion scandalously sown:
"This last line is critical. 'An objective situation of sin.' This I think is the reason that I have received hundreds of e-mails over the last few days from bewildered and scandalized Catholics. They take their faith seriously, and far from judging what Senator Kennedy may or may not have confessed in his final days, or whether he repented or not, they SAW an 'objective situation of sin' in his voting record and in his public pronouncements. They also saw a fundamental incoherence between his professed Faith and some of the positions he championed.
“'Why is the Church saluting a man who constantly promoted abortion and had no respect for traditional marriage? I thought this was something we were not allowed to do.'
“'Watching this coverage of the Kennedy Funeral I keep asking, whatever happened to scandal?'
"These people are not upset about Chappaquiddick or the huge lapses in the Senator’s long and storied life. They surely understand that forgiveness for these public and private acts is possible, and well within the merciful reach of the Church. The problem here is one of public witness and appearances-- the corrupting example, the 'objective situation of sin.' Even if Senator Kennedy privately confessed his unrelenting public support for abortion and embryonic stem cell research, didn’t he owe the public and his Catholic colleagues--his family members who still serve the public--some correction? Shouldn’t he have offered them some last admonition that might have led them to the right path, assuming that he found it, late in his life?
"Judgment remains the exclusive domain of God and no one should presume to know Senator Kennedy’s eternal destination. Nor should he be fashioned into the exemplar of what it means to be a Catholic public servant.
"How his legacy of civil rights, supporting union causes, his defense of immigrants, his commitment to the poor, and his efforts to reduce war would have been morally enhanced had he coupled them with a defense of the most vulnerable members of society: the voiceless millions who have lost their lives to abortion. Unlike his sister Eunice, who tried to turn the Democratic party away from its attachment to abortion, Ted Kennedy pushed the party in [the] other direction. Throughout Kennedy’s funeral many attempted to brandish his poverty legislation or immigration reform as evidence that he had fulfilled his obligations as a Catholic legislator. A close reading of what Cardinal Ratzinger wrote above, shows that it clearly does not. As the Pope has recently written, the foundation of 'social justice' and the heart of Catholic social teaching is the right to life."
That is the Catholic position and there is no exception for Senator Kennedy or anyone else.
In his letter to Pope Benedict XVI ;publicly read from by Cardinal McCarrick, Senator Kennedy wrote in part:
“I want you to know Your Holiness that in my nearly 50 years of elective office I have done my best to champion the rights of the poor and open doors of economic opportunity. I have worked to welcome the immigrant, to fight discrimination and expand access to health care and education. I have opposed the death penalty and fought to end war… I work to develop an overall national health policy that guarantees health care for everyone. I have always tried to be a faithful Catholic, Your Holiness, and though I have fallen short through human failings, I have never failed to believe and respect the fundamental teachings of my faith.“
Whether delusional or deliberately deceptive, Senator Kennedy's claim never to have failed to "respect the fundamental teachings" of the Roman Catholic faith is patently false.
"Sadly, it must be admitted that despite the good he did (and I know people who were personally touched by his generosity), Senator Kennedy failed to at least publicly 'respect the fundamental teachings of (his) faith'; principally that the right to life is universal, God given, and all are obliged to defend it."
There's no doubt about it!
But the pro-abortion pretense of devoutness and fidelity to the Roman Catholic faith was shamelessly promoted during "the spectacle."
"The prayer intercessions at the funeral mass, the endless eulogies, the image of the Cardinal Archbishop of Boston reading prayers, and finally Cardinal McCarrick interring the remains sent an uncontested message: One may defy Church teaching, publicly lead others astray, deprive innocent lives of their rights, and still be seen a good Catholic, even an exemplary one. The casual viewer is tempted to think that Catholicism has become a Church of externals where core doctrines and major teachings are as malleable as they are in the nearest Protestant community. Or worse, to think it all a hollow show."
The false message was enhanced because Cardinal McCarrick did NOT explain what the "Pope's response" really was.
"As a final desperate attempt to stamp the imprimatur of the Pope upon the funereal proceedings, Cardinal McCarrick read what he called the 'Pope’s response' to Senator Kennedy. Actually it was a note, very likely from the Secretariat of State. This is the sort of thing any member of laity receives when they send a prayer request or a Christmas card to the Pope. Cardinal McCarrick made is seem as if it had the weight of a new encyclical. It read in part:
'The Holy Father has the letter which you entrusted to President Barack Obama… He was saddened to know of your illness, and asked me to assure you of his concern and his spiritual closeness… His Holiness prays that in the days ahead you may be sustained in faith and hope, and granted the precious grace of joyful surrender to the will of God, our merciful Father.'
"This was a cordial letter sent to the Senator. It was not meant for public consumption. The Pope issued no public statement upon the death of Ted Kennedy. Nor did he release any public letter to the family as he did, appropriately, when Kennedy’s sister, the very pro-life Eunice Kennedy-Shriver died several weeks ago. The Vatican newspaper did report Ted Kennedy’s passing and noted with displeasure his support of abortion rights. At least one Vatican official was quoted over the weekend, saying: 'Here in Rome Ted Kennedy is nobody. He’s a legend with his own constituency. If he had influence in the past it was only with the Archdiocese of Boston and that eventually disappeared too.'
"For those who find this hard to accept, ask Cardinal McCarrick. He has the original letter."
That's the Cardinal McCarrick who defies canon law to avoid
"confrontation at the Communion rail."
Michael J. Gaynor has been practicing law in New York since 1973. A former partner at Fulton, Duncombe & Rowe and Gaynor & Bass, he is a solo practitioner admitted to practice in New York state and federal courts and an Association of the Bar of the City of New York member.
Gaynor graduated magna cum laude, with Honors in Social Science, from Hofstra University's New College, and received his J.D. degree from St. John's Law School, where he won the American Jurisprudence Award in Evidence and served as an editor of the Law Review and the St. Thomas More Institute for Legal Research. He wrote on the Pentagon Papers case for the Review and obscenity law for The Catholic Lawyer and edited the Law Review's commentary on significant developments in New York law.
The day after graduating, Gaynor joined the Fulton firm, where he focused on litigation and corporate law. In 1997 Gaynor and Emily Bass formed Gaynor & Bass and then conducted a general legal practice, emphasizing litigation, and represented corporations, individuals and a New York City labor union. Notably, Gaynor & Bass prevailed in the Second Circuit in a seminal copyright infringement case, Tasini v. New York Times, against newspaper and magazine publishers and Lexis-Nexis. The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed, 7 to 2, holding that the copyrights of freelance writers had been infringed when their work was put online without permission or compensation.
Gaynor currently contributes regularly to www.MichNews.com, www.RenewAmerica.com, www.WebCommentary.com, www.PostChronicle.com and www.therealitycheck.org and has contributed to many other websites. He has written extensively on political and religious issues, notably the Terry Schiavo case, the Duke "no rape" case, ACORN and canon law, and appeared as a guest on television and radio. He was acknowledged in Until Proven Innocent, by Stuart Taylor and KC Johnson, and Culture of Corruption, by Michelle Malkin. He appeared on "Your World With Cavuto" to promote an eBay boycott that he initiated and "The World Over With Raymond Arroyo" (EWTN) to discuss the legal implications of the Schiavo case. On October 22, 2008, Gaynor was the first to report that The New York Times had killed an Obama/ACORN expose on which a Times reporter had been working with ACORN whistleblower Anita MonCrief.