Newt Gingrich’s scheduled speech at Catholic University next week is prompting
criticism from students who contend that the appearance would violate the school’s
policy barring speakers who have espoused positions contrary to Vatican teachings.
Frank Lankey Jr., 20, political director for the College Democrats, said that
Gingrich’s support for the death penalty and his extramarital affair in the
1990s contradict church teachings and should prohibit him from appearing.
It sounds like some people who are upset at the prevention of
pro-abortion speakers are trying a little turnabout.
In remarks yesterday, Nakas said
that Gingrich’s support for the death penalty does not put him in conflict
with church teachings because "there’s
no absolute prohibition. There’s nothing that says that capital punishment
is necessarily forbidden."
As for Gingrich’s personal relationships — he divorced
in 1999 after having an affair with a congressional aide — Nakas said: "He’s
not a public advocate for adultery. That’s the distinction." [Source]
As a political theorist there is a lot I agree with ole Newt
about but I pretty much lost any personal respect for him when he left
his sick wife and the scummy way he acted in regards to this. I also think
it is ridiculous though to bring up someone’s past affair to block a speech.
We can not know if this sin has repented of. I don’t know the
details as to whether Newt received an annulment before being remarried in a Catholic Church as it does not appear to be public knowlege, so I can’t see how the director for the College Democrats can validly use his affair in this manner.
11 comments
As a Georgian (Gingrich’s home state) I, along with many other of us, look upon Gingrich with sadness. Here is a man who is politically and historically brilliant and articulate; his immorality and callousness with his ex-wife was his downfall. I doubt that he could win office in Georgia.The tempter lurks for us and rejoices when we fall.
The CU Dems are grasping at straws.
I think the death penalty issue is relevant. No, the Church doesn’t teach that its use is absolutely forbidden. But the Church does teach that it may be used only within certain very narrowly-defined circumstances – when there’s no other way to protect society against future crimes by a particular offender. Most pro-dp politicians don’t even claim that they only favor its use in that narrow range of cases. I doubt that Gingrich does. Hence, I think, one should be cautious about honoring him.
Two things in response to Kevin: Firstly, what “most” politicians think or say is of no relevance to Mr. Gingrich’s particular case. Secondly, I know of no occasion when Mr. Gingrich has been faced with anything like an opportunity to vote on the issue one way or another. That is, a bill which would bring the US into line with Rome’s position has never even been tendered in the House nor has there ever been any practical recourse for a Catholic federal legislator on the issue (unlike, say, the PBA ban). Also worth noting is that the “Vatican’s” position here is actually that of JPII’s. That means it ought to be treated with moral seriousness, but it isn’t a doctrine in the sense that the Church’s teaching on abortion is.
The College Democrats are really reaching here, and I think they know it. This has the stench of spite about it, and is almost certainly unrelated to the CD’s passionate opposition to adultery or the death penalty. In fact, I’d go so far as to say their real objection to Mr. Gingrich is that he’s actually in line with the faith in being pro-LIFE, which makes this cynical, petulant little ploy all the more sickening. This is sour grapes over their “Catholic” candidate’s loss, plain and simple.
Newt Gingrich is Catholic?
Gingrich is Southern Baptist.
I think Sage is referring to Senator Kerry.
True Newt is a Southern Baptist, but he applied for an annulment in the Diocese of Atlanta to marry Callista Bisek in the Catholic Church.
I don’t know that having someone to speak can be considered honoring him. I can think of lots of people I’d be interested in hearing speak without honoring them in the least. He isn’t asked to speak at the graduation, and he isn’t being given an honorary degree.
A few years back there was a certain amount of question, in conservative circles, about whether the then-president of Hillsdale College had, or had not, been carrying on an affair with his daughter-in-law, who had recently committed suicide. NR ran a long piece on it, observing that the suicide had apparently been prompted by the news that the father-in-law, having divorced his wife of forty-five years, who was dying of liver cancer, was going to marry some chippie. After reading that incredible fact, I considered it almost a moot point whether he’d been sleeping with his son’s wife or not: no man of common decency would abandon a sick wife to die alone. That’s the act of an emotional Peter Pan, who can’t endure any of the responsibilities or sufferings of adulthood.
It always takes the wind out of their little lefty Catholic sails when you quote the catechism about the death penalty. But we can thank John Paul the Great for muddying another issue and handing these idiots more fuel for what I am sure they think are their very clever arguments.
Hilary: What is your problem with John Paul II?
Sage: JPII is the pope. What he teaches is the teaching of the Church. It is by definition a “doctrine,” even if not certain as the doctrine on abortion is. A Catholic, at any rate, is not free to dissent from it.
I do agree that “bringing to speak” doesn’t necessarily equal “honoring.” However, he’s being brought in by a student group because they like him, not to give a more academic address. In this case, I think we have a form of “honoring.”
Finally, I’d have to see the details of what Gingrich has said on the dp. My point, however, is that it doesn’t follow that because “there’s no absolute prohibition,” the issue is simply irrelevant. There is an “absolute prohibition” in particular cases, and someone whose support for the dp isn’t confined to those cases is at odds with Catholic teaching.