Jesuit order's America magazine urges withdrawal of Kavanaugh nomination
The magazine of the Jesuit religious order in the United States has publicly withdrawn its endorsement of Judge Brett Kavanaugh as Supreme Court justice following testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee by the Jesuit-educated Kavanaugh and the woman accusing him of sexually assaulting her decades ago.
In an editorial posted late Thursday, America magazine said it had no special insight into whether Kavanaugh or Christine Blasey Ford is telling the truth. But it said that the nomination was no longer in the interests of the country and "should be withdrawn."
"If Senate Republicans proceed with his nomination, they will be prioritizing policy aims over a woman's report of an assault," the editors wrote. "Were he to be confirmed without this allegation being firmly disproved, it would hang over his future decisions on the Supreme Court for decades and further divide the country."...
"The Jesuit devotion to hierarchical order and authority, particularly their blind obedience to the pope, is nowhere better seen than in the famous thirteenth rule in the Spiritual Exercises:
âIf we wish to be sure that we are right in all things, we should always be ready to accept this principle: I will believe that the white that I see is black, if the hierarchical church so defines.â" (Sam Storms)
Does truth matter anymore? Does anybody think that a progressive movement in this country will be satiated if they win this battle? This is more about a billion dollar abortion industry than it is about an alleged rape attempt decades ago.
There's the official reason why the Jesuits say the following:
The Editors (of Ameeric) wrote: ...If this were a question of establishing Judge Kavanaughâs legal or moral responsibility for the assault described by Dr. Blasey, then far more stringent standards of proof would apply. His presumption of innocence might settle the matter in his favor, absent further investigation and new evidence. But the question is not solely about Judge Kavanaughâs responsibility, nor is it any longer primarily about his qualifications. Rather it is about the prudence of his nomination and potential confirmation. In addition to being a fight over policy issues, which it already was, his nomination has also become a referendum on how to address allegations of sexual assault...
excerpt from, "The Editors: It is time for the Kavanaugh nomination to be withdrawn"
[ https://tinyurl.com/y7awtsp8 ]
If just look at the article itself, it's reasonable. But as many you have pointed out there are larger issues, such as https://tinyurl.com/n5wkmsd (Jesuits Implode) Since Brett Kavenaugh is so closely linked to the Jesuits, the Jesuits would like him to a lot less in the public eye. So of course, there are other factors influencing the Jesuits writers.
If unsubstantiated allegations is the basis for disqualifications then Paul's blaspheme charge should still be believed by these Jesuits. Jesus should be disqualified from being the Christ for blaspheme also with an additional charge of terrorism. Paul asks the Corinthian assembly Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Â (1Co 6:2) Did not Ford under oath name four witnesses who attended the party in question and all four gave sworn testimonies that the party did not occur? And one of the a long time friend of Ford. Who is the burden of proof upon, the accused or the accuser? This is Naboth's Vineyard orchestrated by the vile Democrats. The same machine that accuses believers of unfair business practices, hate speech, bigotry, and many other false claims. And now I read comments on a Christian website and see opinions all over the place. By the mouth of two or three witnesses (four in Ford's case) clearly shows that she is mistaken on MANY key points. I am not calling Ford a liar but she clearly and admittedly has faulty memories. Please watch the following video.
In the excerpt below of the Shields and Brooks discussion on PBS that is on every Friday and this was the last Friday one, you will find a calm and sane discussion of the Brett Kavanaugh situation. Before the selection I have of David Brooks, Mark Shields had a very good commentary on Sen. Jeff Flake. so, go look at the video or read the transcript of Shields and Brooks. It mostly should have a calming effect on you?
I can see why the Jesuits want their separate themselves from this controversy they have plenty of their own to give them a bad name â đ
David Brooks wrote: ... we had a very believable and compelling witness in Dr. Ford, I thought also a compelling witness in Kavanaugh, a man who clearly believes in what he's saying.
And, as a result, because â and there was no evidence corroborating one side of the other, basically. And so we had a country breaking down purely on tribal lines. Who you believed was 100 percent determined by which party you supported.
And there was no intellectual integrity. People were making an avalanche of bad arguments to support their side. Passions were going up, as people egged each other on. And so maybe this will allow us all to step back.
And, frankly, there are a lot of questions I would like to see answered. I sat there trying to think, who do I believe? And I really don't know. And so to have Judge interviewed, to have Leland Keyser, Ford's friend, interviewedâŠ
.... Who was allegedly at the party.
Maybe they will be some more information. Maybe we can find the house where it happened, and that can provoke some more facts.
And so, to me, just to prick the bubble of hysteria that was sweeping around this whole thing was a very important thing....
-- "Shields and Brooks on Brett Kavanaughâs confirmation..." http://tinyurl.com/yafztej2