Kevin Miller blogs an excellent response to Bill Cork in the debate over pro-life and abortion, President Bush, and the current crop of nominies for the Abortion Party. This is not the first time Bill and Kevin have locked horns, as evidenced by this post a year ago on Just War theory.
Of course, I find myself agreeing with Prof. Miller in the current debate over whether or not abortion is a defining issue. As most of my regular readers know, I have the highest respect for Kevin Miller as a theologian. Nevertheless, I'm somewhat confused by how Bill appears to raise the issue of the Iraqi War in order to challenge Dubya's pro-life credentials. If we go back exactly one year, I recall that I strongly opposed the War in Iraq, but who was so favorable to the war that he was bandying about the word sedition to describe its opponents, because he intrinsically trusted the President and simply dismissed as ridiculous the arguments of the war's opponents to which he now appeals in the abortion debate?
Anyway, while Bill is a pretty good ecumenist (since that's his professional specialty within the theological sciences), I think I will stick to Kevin Miller when it comes to moral theology since that's Kevin specialty within the theological sciences. (Also, throughout the Church's history canonists and moral theologians have traditionally been allies). That being said, having consistently opposed the war, I still maintain abortion trumps this issue when it comes to the ballot box.
Aw, thanks! (Sob, gush.)
Dear Mr. Vere,
I don't know if abortion "trumps" anything. It certainly is a pivot, however, it seems a pivot shared with a number of other concerns--war, the death penalty, and proper support for young families formed as a result of making abortion illegal. It's on these latter three that I would fault Mr. Bush. However, I can't say I see anything better among the Dems, except for Jcecil3, so--where does one turn? Seems Disputations is busy asking that question and trying to answer.
shalom,
Steven
I agree with you concerning leaving Moral Theology to Kevin, but there is an underlying point. While it is true that each person has his own specialty, why is it that we cannot expect people to be more well rounded. I have noticed especially in Catholic cirles that those who are very concerned with Catholic social teachings, are not necessarily concerned with teachings on other moral issue and vice versa. I like to pride myself on the fact that while I may not know everything about every subject, I know enough about liturgy, theology, canon law, moral theology, catholic social teaching, etc. to be able to hold a semi-intellectual conversation. It seems to me we need to not just rely on our academic discipline and embrace the entirety of Catholicism.