Matt C. Abbott: On Sean Hannity's Heresy & Helping Catholic Journalist, Robert Kumpel

Catholic journalist, Matt C. Abbott has published an article covering two important stories.

The article is available here: Pro-life priest criticizes Sean Hannity; Catholic journalist in legal trouble

The first story deals with Human Life International President, Rev. Thomas J. Euteneuer, STL, who recently (and justifiably) criticized Catholic political commentator, Sean Hannity for his heretical stance on matters of faith and morals.

Fr. Euteneuer's recent article may be viewed here: Sean Hannity's Gospel

After writing his article, Fr. Euteneuer recently appeared on Hannity & Colmes to discuss his article with Sean Hannity and the video of his appearance is worth watching. Until it is up on YouTube, you can watch it by clicking here: Judgment Day: Priest claims Hannity's stance on birth control makes him a bad Catholic

Sean Hannity did not come off well in this segment, and I am embarrassed for him. It is shameful that he resorted to bashing the Church over the sex abuse scandals in order to help his own image.

It should also be mentioned that Sean Hannity has repeatedly stated on his programs that he opposes legal abortion, "except in cases of rape, incest, and saving the life of the mother". In other words, he supports legal abortion in cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of the pregnant mother.

I have never understood how someone could say they believe abortion is evil, and even murder, but then say that they support that evil form of murder for unborn babies if they are conceived through rape or incest. If it were moral to electively abort unborn babies in cases of rape or incest, it would logically follow that elective abortion is not intrinsically evil, in which case, why oppose abortion at all? Such a position amounts to saying that the value of innocent, unborn, human life is intrinsically bound to the comfort level of a pregnant mother about the circumstances surrounding her pregnancy, which is a fundamentally pro-abortion view.

Supporting legal, elective abortion in cases of rape or incest is an absurd position that seeks to appease the extreme case situations presented as excuses for abortion by abortion advocates. Agreeing with them on that point involves the implication that elective abortion is not intrinsically evil and is even moral in some instances, which inevitably leads to the slippery slope position that elective, legal abortion is a moral option in any circumstance.

Arguments in support of direct, elective abortion to save the life of a mother are equally problematic, because they involve the error of doing something intrinsically evil in order to avoid the loss of something good.

The moral law requires that we do good and avoid evil. We may never do evil, even in order to bring about a good. If we deliberately do evil to bring about some good, even the good of saving a human life, we unwittingly contradict the notion that there is such a thing as moral evil, and we unwittingly deny the golden rule: "And as you wish that men would do to you, do so to them." (Luke 6:31) A thief who steals unwittingly denies his own right to private property by his action; a position he would never support if you tried to steal from him. Yet in stealing, he implies that theft is moral, even though he knows in his heart it is not (because he would never want anyone to steal from him). The same is true for any person who deliberately does any evil act, even with the intention of bringing about some good effect. The deliberate commission of evil on the part of any human person (even in matters of venial sin) essentially denies the rectitude of God's eternal law and any belief in any kind of objective moral law (at least in practice). Yet nobody would maintain such a denial, if the same evil were to be done to them.

Cases where one willingly risks his or her life to save others are not the same thing. Although there is never a moral obligation to sacrifice one's life to save others, it is not a deliberate act of evil to do so, and that is the difference. The risk of death (or even the loss of one's own life) is an unintended secondary effect as a result of the primary action taken to save the life of another, whereas an act of direct, elective abortion involves doing an evil act first in order to bring about the good effect of saving a pregnant mother's life.

If Sean Hannity studied Theology in the seminary, as he said (and I don't doubt that he did), he read the wrong books and/or was misled by his instructors, or he deliberately chooses to ignore what he knows to be the teaching of the Church, because if he wants people to believe he is "in the know" he should know better.

You can contact Sean Hannity here: hannity@foxnews.com

Matt Abbott's second story deals with the ongoing legal troubles of Catholic journalist, Robert Kumpel.

I repeat my personal appeal for you to please do all that you can to help Robert Kumpel.

Any thoughts?

Comments

[Patrick]

Everytime Hannity said "judge not lest ye be judged" I was waiting for the priest to say "I am not judging you...I am judging your words and your ideas." For some reason alot people have a hard time making the distinction.

Also, it should have been pointed out that Hannity was making a moral relativism argument when he asked would you rather a woman use artificial birth control or have an abortion. The priest could have simply said "both acts are evil, and I can condone neither of them."

Hannity also engaged in an ad hominem attack when he carried on about the sex abuse scandal to a priest that didn't have anything to do with it as far as we know. If Cardinal Mahony were there then I could understand it.

It was refreshing to hear the priest say he would deny Communion to a very public sinner.

Those sorts of shows do not consist of real debate. The segments last only a few minutes, and the pundit cuts off the guest at will. Sometimes the guests can't get a word in edgewise.

[David]

The previous comment post is well said.

Sean Hannity is publicly fueling anti-Catholicism and has been for a long time. I want to know why the Catholic League says nothing publicly about it.

Please contact the Catholic League and ask them why they don't address this issue.

[Bill Cork]

On Kumpel, see: Valdosta priest obtains restraining order on parishioner

[Jordan Potter]

None of this is surprising. A few years back I heard Sean Hannity talk about his rejection of the Church's teaching on contraception, so I'm also not surprised that he believes in punishing innocent unborn babies for the sins of one of the parents, or places the mother's life above the life of the baby. Hannity's real church is the Republican Party, but for all his "conservative" beliefs he's really not all that far from Democrat Party principles.

Sean, you may be a great American, but God doesn't care who is and isn't a great American. You need to be a great Catholic -- then the "great American" stuff will take care of itself.

[jimbo]

Sean Hannity came off very poorly in this segment. The most annoying thing was that he didn't give Father a chance to speak, he just kept cutting him off and attacking him. Despite being conservative, I was never a big fan of Sean's, and this makes me even less so. I think it would have been better to have Alan Colmes do the interview, as he would not have been as blinded by emotion.

[Ted]

No link came through, Bill

[elena maria vidal]

I commend Father Euteneuer for once again making a public stand for the truth.

[Dude]

Not surprised. I have listened to Sean since '97 when he was in NYC exclusively, when I used to live there.

The only part of him that ever makes reference to God is when he repeatedly - over the years - always and exclusively quotes - "let not your heart be troubled..."

Apparently Sean does not let his heart be troubled regarding his faith.

I also listened to Franklin Graham on his show once and Graham used Hannity's show as a jumping off point to evangelize Hannity and his listeners, Hannity responded by saying something to the effect of "wow, you're a lot more serious about Jesus than I am, I can't get that serious..."

Graham's dedication to Christ (albeit low-brow) made Hannity look like a joke on his own show.

Yes, Sean is a good American, but a weak example of nominal (seemingly at best) Catholicism.

Kudos to the priest for standing up.

I wish Sean were a stronger Catholic, we need somebody with his status to stand up for the church. It saddens me that it is not him.

Funny this comes out, as I have always detected this.

I always did think it was kind of bogus that Hannity is one of those who lends his name to H.W. Crocker's "Triumph: The Power and The Glory of the Catholic Church." - Great book, my bet was always that Hannity knew not the history nor did he value to dogmas of our church.

[Dude]

Perhaps something like this could be the impetus for Sean to rethink his faith...

Although I doubt it, I certainly hope so.

We've all had to do it.

****, or get off the pot.

Encouraging Sean to study his faith will be like balm to a wounded soul. I know Sean was touched by Fr. Tom, even if at first he was hurt. God works in mysterious ways and hopefully Sean will experience some conversion from this encounter. Sean Hannity can do much for the promotion of truth, let's pray he embrace the Church's teaching on all issues and be not afraid to speak the truth in love.

[Stephanie A. Richer]

Can more information be provided re: Robert Kumpel? I have read the letter and an article, and no details are given, save the conclusion that his 1st and 2nd Amenedemtn rights have been violated. I assume since it seems to be at the appeal stage, a trial was conducted, but I do not see anything about wheat testimony was given, what evidence was produced, etc. I understand that he is a conservative Catholic freelance writer, but even he might possibly be guilty of violating state laws in Georgia - simply because he is a reporter does not provide him with a carte blanche to act in any manner he thinks is needed to report on a story.

[Thomistic]

These are the only articles I know of that discuss the situation surrounding Robert Kumpel's case:

Scandal In Georgia: Catholic Journalist Under Attack For Asking Too Many Questions

Valdosta priest obtains restraining order on parishioner

Catholic journalist in legal trouble

Can You Help A Catholic Journalist In Need?

I don't know if there is an article describing what happened in court. I have only been sent the information I have shared with you above and don't have any more details to share with you.

You may be able to research the court records in Georgia if you are interested in those details of the case.

Pax,

Thomistic

[Hugh]

I'd like to challenge your position that abortion is "intrinsically evil" and therefore always wrong morally. I base this challenge on (1) the Catholic belief that killing another in self-defense, or in defense of another, is not wrong and (2) your following logic:

"If we deliberately do evil to bring about some good, even the good of saving a human life, we unwittingly contradict the notion that there is such a thing as moral evil, and we unwittingly deny the golden rule."

First, with regard to the golden rule, who is to say that I, for example, would not want someone to kill me if my existence were to become lethal to another; moreover, the pro-choice stance does not ipso facto contradict the edict, "And as you wish that men would do to you, do so to them."

Second, killing in self-defense (during war, for example) is often necessarily an intended effect as a result of the primary action taken to save the life of oneself or another. This, contrary to your logic, does not render killing ubiquitously permissible. Thus, one could logically adduce cases in which abortion is permissible.

Finally, you might object to my above two points on this ground: the unborn child is innocent of any threat that he/she poses to his/her mother and that, for this reason, it is erroneous to invoke self-defense as a justification for abortion. This would be an objection that is grounded in unwavering opposition to abortion, not in your own logic. Moreover, you claim that abortion is intrinsically evil, that any justification is somehow a contradiction to moral law. Note, however, that my above two points illustrate that no such contradiction invariably exists.

Hugh

[dominic]

Actually there are several Catholic Churches in the Valdosta area - all within easy driving distance. Also, I am not so certain that the courts did order Mr. Kumpel to stay away from Church services - all the Priest was asking for was the 'stalking' after services, and at night to stop.

It bothers me too, that the 'defense fund' has an address which is a personal property. Wouldn't it guarantee the ethical use of any donated funds, if it went straight to a lawyer or something?

[dominic]

seems to me too, that the continuing posting of this story by friends of Mr kumpel violates the court order.....

any thoughts?