Smoky Mountains Sunrise
Showing posts with label Professor Robert George. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Professor Robert George. Show all posts

Friday, April 17, 2015

Professor Robert George Urges Pope to Support Archbishop Cordileone

Princeton Professor Robert George has written an open letter to Pope Francis urging that he show "quiet support" for embattled San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone.  The Archbishop has been severely criticized for insisting that the Catholic schools of his Archdiocese bear witness to the moral teachings of the faith.  Professor George's letter, published in First Things, follows:

Your Holiness:

I recall with pleasure and gratitude my visit to the Vatican in November and your moving address to our Colloquium on the Complementarity of Man and Woman in Marriage. There, gathered with leaders of the world’s great religious traditions, East and West, you reaffirmed the Church’s doctrine of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife and spoke movingly of the right of every child “to grow up in a family with a father and mother.”

Here in the United States we are blessed with many bishops who join you in bearing witness to these profound and indispensable truths. Even in the face of social and economic pressure on them to yield or go silent, they boldly and joyously proclaim the Church’s teachings on marriage and chastity. None has been more fearless or ardent in upholding these beautiful and liberating teachings than Salvatore Cordileone, the Archbishop of San Francisco.

Faithful Catholics in his archdiocese and throughout our country have been edified by his labors—particularly those addressed to ensuring that the Catholic schools under his care teach and model fidelity to Catholic doctrine in all matters of faith and morals. Unsurprisingly, however, these labors have drawn the antagonism of many who despise the Church’s moral teachings, especially those concerning marriage and sexual morality.

This morning, a group of people published an open letter to you in a San Francisco newspaper urging you to remove Archbishop Cordileone from his office. They identify themselves as Catholics and plead with you to send them a new archbishop that will be true to what they describe as “our values.” But their values, unlike the values proclaimed and upheld by Archbishop Cordileone, are not the values of the Catholic faith. Their complaint against the Archbishop finally comes down to his refusal to bow down before the values of contemporary secularist sexual morality and gender ideology. For this, however, he should be applauded and encouraged, not condemned, much less ousted.

Be assured, Holy Father, that the “prominent Catholics,” as the media describes them, who call on you to remove Archbishop Cordileone do not speak for the faithful Catholics of San Francisco. Already, a movement has emerged to support and encourage the Archbishop. It is a movement of grateful Catholics—not “prominent” people—but ordinary men and women, many of them immigrants or the children of immigrants from many lands. These men and women are grateful to have an archbishop who believes and teaches what the Church believes and teaches. They send their children to the diocesan schools because they desire for them an education imbued with a Christian spirit and shaped by the teachings of the Catholic faith. Their spirits have been lifted by Archbishop Cordileone’s tireless work to ensure that such an education is available to all who desire it.

With gratitude to God for your own witness and ministry, I humbly ask you to join those of us who are supporting and encouraging Archbishop Cordileone. It would be a wonderful thing for you quietly to let him know that he has your blessing, and that the insults and defamations he is experiencing as a result of his faithful apostolic work are a participation in the redemptive suffering of Jesus, who said: “anyone who would be my disciple must take up his cross and follow me.”

Sincerely yours in our beloved Savior,

Robert P. George

Robert P. George is McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence and Director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions at Princeton University

Wednesday, April 18, 2012

From Our Mail: Manhattan Declaration Issues Somber Update on Chuck Colson's Condition

The Manhattan Declaration was born in the heart of Chuck Colson, and you are among the nearly 525,000 persons who have endorsed this statement of conscience over the past two years.  Many of you have been praying fervently for Chuck since his surgery some two weeks ago.  There have been some encouraging signs about Chuck’s condition during these days, but earlier this morning our friend Jim Liske, CEO of Prison Fellowship Ministries, gave the following update to the staff and supporters of Prison Fellowship:
“It is with a heavy, but hopeful heart that I share with you that it appears our friend, brother, and founder will soon be home with the Lord. Chuck’s condition took a decided turn yesterday, and the doctors advised Patty and the family to gather by his bedside.
As you know, Chuck underwent surgery more than two weeks ago to remove a pool of clotted blood on the surface of his brain. And while we had seen some hopeful signs for Chuck’s recovery—including his ability to talk happily with Patty and the kids—it seems that God may be calling him home.”
We will keep you posted on Chuck’s condition.  Please continue to hold him and the entire Colson family in your prayers. 
Chuck’s life, his destiny, and his legacy are in the hands of God. 
Robert P. George
Timothy George

Monday, January 23, 2012

Leading Catholics Denounce Obama Administration's Disregard for Conscience Rights

Obama and his "Catholic" Quislings
Leading American Catholics, including Cardinal-designate Timothy Dolan, Robert George and Michael Sean Winters, respond to the Obama administration running roughshod over religious liberty and conscience rights in its requirement that all health plans cover contraceptives free of charge.

Thursday, May 28, 2009

Romney and Obama Advisor Urges Abolition of Government Recognition of Marriage

By Gary Glenn
American Family Association of Michigan

Doug Kmiec, the Obama-supporting law professor who today called for abolition of government recognition of marriage between one man and one woman was -- immediately before he endorsed Obama -- co-chair of the Romney for President Advisory Committee on the Constitution and the Courts.

His call to deconstruct legal recognition and thus formal social endorsement and support for one-man, one-woman marriage should come as no surprise, given his support for first a Republican and then a Democratic presidential candidate whose vocal support for the homosexual agenda and opposition to constitutionally securing the definition of traditional marriage have at various times during their political careers been identical.

Romney -- under no court order to do so, but solely at his own initiative via executive order -- implemented the actual practice of so-called homosexual "marriage" in Massachusetts, ordering a revision of the state's marriage licenses to remove reference to a "husband" and "wife" and then ordering magistrates to either issue them to homosexual couples or resign. Obama promises, by repealing the federal Defense of Marriage Act, to expand nationwide what Romney started in Massachusetts.

It's no surprise that a lawyer who endorsed Obama would propose abolishing legal recognition of marriage as a unique social ideal between a man and a woman. It should open some eyes that the very same man was chosen by Mitt Romney to be his chief advisor on issues regarding the Constitution and the courts, a post that reasonably could have led to a similar position in the Romney Administration, including advising the president on judicial appointments and social policy, had Romney been elected.

Catholic Obama Campaign Adviser Wants to Replace All Legal ‘Marriages’ with ‘Civil Licenses'

By Pete Winn

A top constitutional law professor who served as a surrogate for then-presidential candidate Barack Obama told that he would like to see “marriage” replaced in the legal sens
e with a neutral “civil license.”

“As awkward as it may be, I think the way to untie the state from this problem is to create a new terminology that they would apply to everyone--straight or gay-call it a ‘civil license,’ said Douglas Kmiec, a law professor at Pepperdine University and author of “Can a Catholic Support Him?’

“The net effect of that, would be to turn over--quite appropriately, it seems to me, the concept of marriage to churches and a church understanding,” Kmiec said.

Kmiec said that one of the things that motivated the passage of California’s Proposition 8, which defines marriage as between one man and one woman, “was a genuine concern on the part of religious believers--including myself--that the previous California ruling was not addressing what that would mean for religious practice.”

“After the state of California acknowledged same-sex marriage, would that mean, for example, that churches like the Catholic Church and the Mormon Church, which don’t acknowledge those relationships as a marriage by virtue of their scriptural and theological teaching--would they be subject to penalty? Would they lose public benefits? Would they be subject to lawsuits based upon some theory of discrimination?”

Kmiec said his idea would address those questions.

“One of the possible outcomes that would be good in this case, would be if the state got out of the marriage business, did their licensing under a different name--which, of course, would satisfy the state’s interests for purposes of distribution of taxation and property, but then the question of who can and cannot be married would be entirely determined in your voluntarily chosen faith community.

“We know that religions differ as to how they see that question,” Kmiec said. “But it seems to me that would be a nice way to reaffirm the significance of marriage as a religious concept--because that is a much fuller concept than just civil marriage.”

"Because, as we all know, from a standpoint of religious belief, the couple is not just making a promise to themselves, or even to their local community or their state, but they are making a covenant between themselves and their Creator. That’s something that is differently expressed in different religious traditions, but we shouldn’t lose the value of that, and this is an opportunity to heighten the value of that in order to help the State of California out of the corner it has worked itself into.”

But Princeton University law professor Robert George, who is also a top constitutional scholar--and a Catholic academic--said that Kmiec’s idea would do away with the public role of marriage--and banish it to the religious “ghetto.”

“That is a terrible idea,” George said. “The idea that the state would abandon its concern for the institution of marriage, that it would treat marriage as a purely religious matter, is I think a very bad one.”

Marriage is more than merely a religious institution, George told

"It’s not like baptisms and bar mitzvahs,” he said. “It has profound social significance, public significance; it’s a pre-political institution. It exists even apart from religion, even apart from polities. It’s the coming together of a husband and wife, creating the institution of family in which children are nurtured.”

“The family is the original and best Department of Health, Education and Welfare,” George said.

“No government agency can ever surpass it, ever has surpassed it,” he added. “Governments and economies and systems of law all rely upon the family to produce something they need, but that they themselves cannot produce, and that is, basically honest, decent, law abiding people of goodwill--citizens--who can take their rightful place in society.

“Family is built on marriage, and government--the state--has a profound interest in the integrity and well-being of marriage, and to write it off as if it were a purely a religiously significant action and not an institution and action that has a profound public significance, would be a terrible mistake,” George said.

“I don’t know where Professor Kmiec is getting his idea, but it’s a very, very bad one.”