« Holy Whapping Television Network | Main | Catholic School Teachers.. »
January 30, 2007
Terry McAuliffe, Knight
...of Malta.
As Dale Price says of this:
Terry McAuliffe, (former DNC chair) unapologetic defender of partial birth abortion, is about to be honored for his selfless devotion to and efforts on behalf of the Catholic Faith by being admitted to the Knights of Malta.
Once again, those laboring in the trenches to uphold the Gospel are about to take a shiv between the shoulderblades. Once again, the unfaithful get front row seats while the laborers in the vineyard are told to shut up. This is of a piece with the detonation over the Buffalo Deacon’s homily (poor, poor "Brian," whose remarkably base political whoredom is noted here) and the Archbishop of Washington’s studied refusal to directly address life issues with any Catholics in public life. Yes, the Church’s leaders preach one thing while coddling the opponents within her ranks.
Kathy Shaidle, who links to a Hugh Hewitt interview:
HH: No, but I mean, the whole abortion controversy, that’s just… you compartmentalize that and put that aside?
TM: I can, as can many Catholics.
HH: But I know many Catholics do, but do you think it’s right…Do you go to Mass and all that stuff, Terry?
TM: I go… yeah, I do.
HH: You do?
TM: In fact, I’m up to be on the Knights of Malta right now. They’ve just asked me to join the Knights of Malta.
HH: Oh, we’d better put out a word.
TM: Are you one of those?
HH: I’ve got friends in the Knights of Malta, yeah. You might not come back from your first trip to Rome.
TM: You need to go into the Knights of Malta.
HH: Huh?
TM: And as you know, the Holy Father himself, John Paul II, blessed my wife’s engagement ring when I wound up being at a private Mass for us in his private chapel.
HH: Nice picture. I know. Did he know about your supporting late term abortions?
TM: Sure, he knew he was.
Kathy provides contact info...so I will too:
1730 M. Street, NW, Suite 403
Washington, DC 20036
202-331-2494 - Phone
202-331-1149 - Faxor use the contact form at their website.
The Knights of Malta U.S. website:
The Order of Malta is a lay, religious order of the Catholic Church. It is a Hospitaller order, founded in Jerusalem during the eleventh century. Members of the Order seek to glorify God through his or her work with the sick and the poor and witness of the Catholic faith.
AKA club for wealthy Catholics, many of whom are deeply serious about their faith - I've met a few who were profoundly pro-life, living lives of great generosity to the poor, just like the mission statement says. But, as with any of these honorary groups, it mostly comes down to wealth and social position, in the end.
Posted by Amy Welborn | Permalink
Comments
Hmmm, left me somewhat depressed. I guess the world's standards (fame, position, money) count for more than anything else, including all that unworldly Catholic stuff. Seems that those is charge would have some sense of shame but you certainly wouldn't know it.
From Canada.
Tony
Posted by: Tony at Jan 30, 2007 10:55:16 PM
Fr. Drinan's political philosophy has won out. I feel as if we are experiencing the formation of the Church of England Redux.
The only problem is that those in favor of the breakup will claim Thomas More as their exemplar--pity.
How does one argue with absurdity?
Posted by: Gabe at Jan 30, 2007 11:10:00 PM
Mine to the Knights:
'The applicant must have a record of service to the Catholic Church and to Catholic-related causes by lending professional expertise or "hands-on" volunteer service to the poor.'
Mr. McAuliffe's elevation demonstrates pretty clearly that obstinate public support for the butchery of the unborn, in knowing opposition to the teaching of the Church, is not considered scandalous by the Order. Either that or Democratic party activism is considered volunteer service to the poor in and of itself.
There are many reasons why I would _never_ have expected to be invited to join the Knights of Malta, but there were no reasons that I would have disdained the invitation. Until now. Honestly, what has Mr. McAuliffe done that has overcome his having worked so hard, and so publicly, against the Gospel of Life?
Posted by: Ed the Roman at Jan 30, 2007 11:24:05 PM
Before this goes on anymore, where's the actual news article, feed, or source? All we have is some lady's webpage, and I don't think that is good enough for me.
Posted by: Gabe at Jan 31, 2007 12:29:02 AM
I'm with Gabe. We need s facts here, not just rumor. This just doesn't ring true to me.
Posted by: Rocinante at Jan 31, 2007 12:36:47 AM
Rightwing radio demagogues are no more protectors of life than so called pro-abortion persons you detest. When you hold up persons as sacred cows you will inevitably find them to be less than holy years later. Towing the line is just that - demagoguery. These same fools Hewitt, send our boys and girls to harm their souls in an unjustified war while risking not so much as a tax hike themself, all the while complaining about partial birth abortion, something that is the perview and perogative of the female gender. Should women whose fetus has gone stillborn be not allowed a D&E? Under the draconian ban they too will not be allowed this treatment. How sane. How Pavonish.
Posted by: Lee Darnell at Jan 31, 2007 12:37:20 AM
Several pro-abort pols are numbered among the Knights of Malta in California, including former LA Mayor Riordan.
There are also a lot of unbelievably heroic Knights in California.
At base, unfortunately, they are selected for wealth, and not because they are wheat or chaff.
Sadly, they should be the "go to" group when important issues arise in California such as parental notification, but they are a non-player altogether.
Posted by: Jack Smith at Jan 31, 2007 1:16:39 AM
You know what we need? For some REAL Knights to resign if this goes through.
Posted by: Ed Peters at Jan 31, 2007 3:10:49 AM
The behavior of some bishops and even cardinals (Marini's comments on euthanasia, Wuerl refusing to teach) shocks and saddens, causes scandal. In weaker moments the thought crosses my mind that I seem to have little in common with these people. They are a source of doubt, diminishing faith.
It also seems that we are at a point in Catholic history where the Reformation was just before the Council of Trent. The Reformers realized that they no longer were part of the Universal Church, and the Catholics realized that in order to remain faithful they must leave them behind.
Today, the much maligned Traditionalists are marginalized by everybody yet they are the more faithful if somewhat combative of the old Catholic Church. The Holy Father has been predicting a smaller future Catholic Church. [He is a bit of a puzzle Himself (appointing Levada and Wuerl, etc.,).] Which part of the pre VII Church is he talking about as the remenant? Is he a modernist or a traditionalist? And where is he going himself?
Posted by: John at Jan 31, 2007 6:33:08 AM
There's a lot of misinformation about the Knights of Malta in these postings. It's one of the Church's oldest, bravest and most unselfish organisations. Yes, there are very aristocratic members, but there are plenty of ordinary folk, who run ambulances, give First Aid courses, etc.
If you feel strongly that somebody should not be a member, right to the Grand Master, whose name is Fra Bertie and who lives in Rome (address available on the website) and give your reasons. Fra Bertie, by the way, is addressed as "Your Highness!"
Posted by: Fr.Fergus at Jan 31, 2007 6:41:21 AM
If you want to verify the veracity of this exchange, check out Hugh Hewitt's website on Townhall.com.
Scroll down to Monday, January 29 - "Terry McAuliffe and Me..."
Unfortunately, this story is accurate.
Posted by: JTII at Jan 31, 2007 6:43:41 AM
"Dash it all, Fra Bertie, the man's a perfect blister!"
"That's as may be, young Glossop, but with Caravaggio in our closet, we can hardly claim universally high standards."
Posted by: Tom K. at Jan 31, 2007 6:52:25 AM
"Fra Bertie, by the way, is addressed as 'Your Highness!'"
Not by any American he isn't! Such pretentiousness.
Posted by: Jim at Jan 31, 2007 7:44:21 AM
"all the while complaining about partial birth abortion, something that is the perview and perogative of the female gender."
Unless the member of the "female gender" is the one going through the partial birth abortion.
Posted by: Donald R.McClarey at Jan 31, 2007 7:47:59 AM
"Not by any American he isn't! Such pretentiousness."
Why not? Is it because we Americans are required to be belchingly, fartfully rude and disrespectful? Or does St. Paul's instruction in Romans 13 to give honor to whom honor is due only apply to non-Americans?
Posted by: Jordan Potter at Jan 31, 2007 8:11:48 AM
It is my understanding that the leader of the Knights of Malta is referred to as "Your Highness" because the order is Sovereign. In other words, their international headquarters, as a matter of international law, is technically its own country. The head of the order is technically a Head of State.
Posted by: Greg Popcak at Jan 31, 2007 8:23:17 AM
Jordan,
FWIW, I read Jim's comment as sarcastic humor, but I'll leave it up to him to clarify his intent.
Posted by: Rick Lugari at Jan 31, 2007 8:27:23 AM
Jordan
St. Paul does not prescribe forms of address. "Sir" or "Ma'am" are perfectly honorable forms of address for Americans to employ; "Your Highness" is entirely optional.
Posted by: Liam at Jan 31, 2007 8:29:53 AM
I am well aware of the great nobility of many Knights.
The problem is that they are well aware of the villainy of McAuliffe, and invited him in anyway. Like the Nobel Peace Prize laureates ranging from Teddy Roosevelt to Yasser Arafat.
Lee, when you stand up to preserve D&X for those who call "PSYCHE!" eight months into a healthy pregnancy, ostensibly for those who miscarry on the grounds that "it's a girl thing - you wouldn't understand", you guarantee my dismissal of your counsel.
Posted by: Ed the Roman at Jan 31, 2007 8:55:44 AM
it mostly comes down to wealth and social position, in the end.
In Massachusetts we used to call outfits like the Knights -- a great example being the Ancient and Honorable Artillery Company -- nothing more than a "chowder and marching society" for the well-to-do and well-born.
So this is just a tempest in a teapot, not worth even my time to say "It's not worth our time."
Posted by: RP Burke at Jan 31, 2007 9:07:08 AM
I was dead convinced that I'd heard this guy
http://imdb.com/name/nm0355095/bio
had been made a Knight of Malta for his charity work, but not a peep about it on either IMDB or Wiki.
And yeah, I'm against McAuliffe being so honored.
Posted by: derringdo at Jan 31, 2007 9:29:30 AM
"Yes, the Church’s leaders preach one thing while coddling the opponents within her ranks."
It's been going on since the times of St. Constantine the Great, what else is new?
Posted by: Schultz at Jan 31, 2007 9:34:43 AM
My husband was thinking about joining. I guess he'll pass now.
Posted by: dymphna at Jan 31, 2007 9:36:59 AM
It may be a tempest in a teapot in the sense that such groups are of marginal importance in the Church, but it is a symbol, and gives people like McAuliffe credentials that undermine the faith of others, and contributes to the growing sense that there are no standards; that nothing you do matters to anyone in the Church. It is worth an email, anyway.
Posted by: Mike Walsh, MM at Jan 31, 2007 9:52:02 AM
I agree with Ed Peters. If this is indeed a fait accompli, I hope that a significant number of Knights, true to their calling to defend the poor and downtrodden, hand in their swords over this.
It may be a "tempest in a teapot", to some, but the defense of the unborn is a clear parallel to the defense of the pilgrims for which this order was founded.
Posted by: Tim Ferguson at Jan 31, 2007 9:55:18 AM
