Greenville, SC Priest Says He Was “Too Hasty” in Obama Comments
Alternative content
Greenville, SC Priest Apologizes For Obama Comments...
A South Carolina priest has apologized for his remarks about Barack Obama. Last week, Father Jay Scott Newman warned his parishoners not to take Communion if they voted for Obama. The priest believes...
A South Carolina priest now says he was “too hasty” in his remarks about President-Elect Barack Obama. Last week, Father Jay Scott Newman warned his parishoners not to take Communion if they voted for Obama. The priest believes Obama’s position on abortion is unacceptable to Catholics. Sunday saw protestors at his church in Greenville. CNN’s Kristen Natasia has more.
Published: November 17, 2008
Updated: November 18, 2008
Greenville, SC—Jack Canfield, parishoner: “The Catholic Church has always been pro-life. I think it’s ridiculous to ask parishoners who voted for Obama to repent. I think people have the right to protest. It’s very American…“
And the picket line formed, more than 50-people strong…outside a place where they’re supposed to come together…
Protestor: “I think it’s a very controversial issue…“
Dividing even those with the same faith…
Supporter: “Sometimes, the questions gets a little muddled, but pro-life is pro-life, abortion is murder. It’s a very simple issue. The issue of abortion is something that should be left to the individual.“
It’s the first mass since Father Jay Scott Newman’s writing in the bulletin…asking church members who voted for Obama to repent before receiving Communion…since he’s a pro-choice candidate…and when we spoke with the pastor…he knew controversy was coming:
Father Jay Scott Newman, Pastor, St. Mary’s Catholic Church: “Very few people don’t have an opinion on this subject and it evokes the deepest of human emotions.“
The kind of emotion putting man, woman…child…out with signs…and very clear sides.
And, when the church processional passed the picket lines, the outspoken priest was silent. This time, his followers did the talking:
Richard Leboeuf, parishoner: “Father Newman is receiving criticism that is unwaranted. We still support our President, he is our 44th President and he is the leader of our country and the Americans will support him. We will agree to disagree on his stance on pro-choice.“
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
So much for the terry and joey blog. I think some people are confusing an issue. Our president-elect is pro-choice, not pro-abortion. He is for reducing the occurance of abortion through education, for one. He advocates adoption as an alternative. He does not impose his personal pro-choice on anyone; pro-choice is simply a statement that each individual has the responsibility to choose for themselves their relationship with God.
Have you personally read Obama’s stand on abortion? There is an awful lot of good about this new president-elect, including his willingness to meet half way with those who want to force their ideas of morality on the rest of the world. He is for helping the wrongfully pregnant, advocating for adoption and allowing each individual to deal with their own circumstances with their relationship with God. “One-issue” voters are relinquishing their right to freedom, and living in a very narrow world all rapped up in themselves with what they think is right. If that is the way you want to live, being told how to run your own life, that is fine with me. Please, do not try to force it on anyone else. I don’t think Father Newman (or Father Corapi, look it up) has a lock on this thinking anyway. Why is it any more important when he says it than when McCain says he is pro-life, or when any of the other conservative members of our esteemed congress profess to being against abortion?
Can you explain to me just “what is at stake”? The world did not fall apart with Obama’s election? Millions of abortions did not take place on November 4th as the votes are being counted? Do you really want to take away the freedom of making up your own mind about your own life? There is only one person you can truly influence in life; and if you let someone else influence you, then you have already given up that freedom.
Try to think on your own. It doesn’t hurt, and it really feels good to figure it all out for yourself. To me an informed conscience is coming to conclusions after long, hard deliberating, reading, and rationalizing the issues. It is not a conscience that is informed by another pseudo authority alone.
Terry, the principle applies to bulletins as well, whether handed out after Mass or online. We wouldn’t put “Vote Republican” fliers in our bulletins, but we can put unbiased fliers on how all candidates stand on particular issues of concern to the Church. What Fr. Newman did was way beyond that: not only getting into politics, but also getting into the subjective state of a person’s soul based on an objective action. The Church only teaches that it is an objective sin to vote for a pro-abortion candidate if their pro-abortion view was the motive for the vote. If it wasn’t, whether the other “Pro-Life” candidate was “viable” (in this case, McCain, who is “Pro-Life-Except”) is a subjective judgment left to individuals, not the Church.
Personally, I voted McCain and haven’t voted Democrat since 1976 (I was young and from Georgia ;-) ). However, one thing not considered about his ticket was Palin. Everyone was thrilled that she was Pro-Life and had a special needs child that 80% of other people would have aborted. But I had to hold my nose voting for her - she belongs to a Pentecostal sect that is vehemently anti-Catholic. By that I mean, not just differing in their views on Catholicism, but they actively proselytize Catholics in an aggressive manner, teach that Catholic’s prayers are blocked by angels from reaching heaven, believe that one of their prayer ministries killed Mother Teresa with their prayers, and is obsessed with witchcraft. The leader of the movement that claimed to have killed Mother Teresa with their prayers anointed Palin before the election.
Viable? Eh. Loony? Yep.
Joey, he didn’t say this from the pulpit in the church. He wrote it online in the church bulletin. I as a layperson, knew it was prohibited for a priest to discuss a party affiliation or candidate affiliation from the pulpit or in church but I did not and do not know that it has been made clear that a priest was not allowed to say anything like this in an online church bulletin. Maybe he was taught this, maybe he wasn’t, I do not know. But I am glad he spoke out, anyway. Considering OTHER churches in our area break this rule every Sunday from their pulpits with brazen fervor, I would certainly be protesting vehemently if anyone went after him regarding this rare exception on Father Newman’s part when he didn’t even say this in church. There would be a lot of churches in the South getting attention they don’t want regarding losing their tax-exempt status, with just cause. In his case, under these circumstances, it would be unjust.
Well with Catholics who were stupid enough to vote for Obama, then the Priest had to spell things out clearly. Time to stop blaming poor catechesis. People will learn what they want to know more about. I bet they know the rules of everything else inside out. As for the tax exempt status, what a joke, who cares, the economy is tumbling down around our ears. It is a new era of standing up for the truth, and everyone knows it. Be not afraid.
May God bless Father Scott Newmann for speaking out for the truth.
I am glad the news media picked up on this. Those Catholics who voted for Obama should think about the effects of voting for a pro-abortion candidate, and realise that such a vote, when there is an alternative (McCain is pro-life), puts them at odds with the Church and the teachings of Christ.
Glenn Dallaire
Bristol, CT
http://www.stgemmagalgani.com
Terry, ultimately, you’ve pointed out Fr. Newman’s fundamental flaw: politics. From Day 1 in the seminary and in all our studies of the Church’s teaching, we were taught never to mention politicians by name nor parties. We were taught to address issues, like abortion and embryonic stem cell research. Attack the issues, persuade the individuals, transform the parties from within, but never tie yourself to one party or candidate. Father Newman would have done much better had he simply written: “Our President-elect was aided by a majority of Catholics who supported him. Those who did might consider writing him a respectful letter saying why they voted for him, but that they do and will oppose him on any measures that would make abortion more available.“ Just like the Bishops did last week.
What Fr. Newman did was wrong, not simply because we risk losing our 501(c)3 tax-exempt status, but because it goes against the Cardinal Virtue of Prudence defined in the Catechism 1806, “right reason in action”, “applying moral principles to particular cases”, “discerning our true good in ever circumstance and to choose the right means of achieving it”. “The prudent man looks where he is going…“
Father Newman did not. He was blinded by his righteousness and forgot Prudence. He at least came to realize that by apologizing for his hastiness. What I hope he realizes is what Matthew meant when he said of Jesus, “the smoldering wick he will not quench, the bruised reed he will not break.“ Catholics who have suffered through 40 years of poor catechesis are the smoldering wicks and the bruised reeds, and Father Newman has just jumped on and snapped them. Our Lord was certainly the Gentle Shepherd and pretty much the entire Gospel of Mark is dedicated to telling the story of why Jesus did not want to be a political Messiah.
When we do lose our 501(c)3 status, the finger of blame will point to men like Fr. Newman and some Bishops who confuse politics with teaching. Lord knows, the diocese already taxes 40% of my offertory, and if imprudent priests like Fr. Newman or Fr. Euteneuer (from HLI who just released one of the most astonishingly harmful letters I’ve ever seen) or bishops like Stafford, who attacked Obama personally in a speech at CUA last Thursday, then the government will be taking the rest of my offertory.
Thanks Fr. Newman!
We had only two candidates to choose from. Obama was clearly, vocally, pro-abortion, even going so far as saying that he would not burden his daughter with a baby if she became pregnant. A vote for Obama and the Democratic party when they are both in alignment with pro-abortion forces is not acceptable for practicing Catholics. The priest was right to tweak their consciences. McCain may have supported embryonic stem-cell research at some point, but it is not part of the Republican party platform. Since we had only two choices left, it was clear what choice Catholics had to make, unless they simply didn’t bother to study the issues. If the Republican candidate had been Alan Keyes, the stem-cell issue would not have been a problem. The Democrat platform clearly includes supporting and encouraging abortion, the Republican party does not. Abortion is the most critical issue, dealing with innocent human life, and a Catholic that knows the issues and votes Democrat anyway, is putting his faith in jeopardy. Scientific breakthroughs are making McCain’s stance on embryonic stem-cell research irrelevant and thankfully, his stance on this issue is not the Republican party stance. Father did not communicate his concerns from the church pulpit, but in an ONLINE bulletin. I don’t think he should be faulted for doing his job.
Terry, here’s an article where McCain explicitly declares his support for Embryonic Stem Cell Research (even AFTER voting to increase funding for Adult Stem Cell Research):
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=11558
Terry,
Embryonic Stem Cell Research is still an issue. Yes, I have heard the arguments that we can do the same research with adult or umbilical cells, however, our opponents dispute that and do not care even if our claims were true - they want to experiment with embryos, and they want to do it with our tax money. They will get a new bill, probably before the 2010 elections.
Your other issues are matters of policy, not fundamental principles. People of good will can disagree on policies (e.g. school vouchers), but not principles (e.g. the right to life).
McCain may not have been as radical as Obama is on abortion, but he holds some deeply flawed views on life issues and cannot properly be called “Pro-Life.“ He might be called a Pro-Lifer “except”... except for rape and incest, except for embryonic research, etc. And I can easily see where he might, out of a sense of bipartisanship, have allowed the vague phrase “health of the mother” or “welfare of the minor” in any future laws seeking to limit abortion. Which usually means something that looks good on paper actually means nothing in practice.
We’ve had 20 of the last 28 years of “Pro-Life” Presidents, and the best we can point to are a few laws limiting abortion, a few judges who might support future limits but are uncertain on overturning Roe. And I think it goes without saying that there would have been no way McCain could have pushed through confirmation a Jurist who dares to say he thinks Roe is flawed, which means he would have appointed a new crop of Souters.
I was not aware of McCain voting to overturn the limiting of stem cell research to the present embryo’s but again by the time of the election that question was moot, since it is no longer necessary to use embryos for that research. McCain was not my choice for President, Alan Keyes was, but unfortunately, he dropped out of the race. McCain is a better choice than Obama on the issues that matter to me and was voted in by the party that is more likely to continue to work toward the moral high ground, in my opinion. I already knew McCain’s stand on some issues I didn’t agree with, but Obama was a worse choice on those issues. I also believe in vouchers for schools, which McCain backs and Obama does not, although, ironically, it looks like Obama’s children will be going to private schools. I’m glad Obama’s children are going to a private school, it’s just that other people would like to have that choice as well and that choice shouldn’t be limited to the well-heeled.
Advertisement