Wednesday, February 22, 2012

Today on Kresta in the Afternoon - February 22, 2012

Talking about the "things that matter most" on Feb. 22

4:00 – Kresta Comentary: Rick Santorum Believes Satan is Real? WOW!
Former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum today is criticizing a report about a 2008 speech at Ave Maria University in which he said “Satan has set his sights on the United States of America,” saying that it’s no great revelation that there is good and evil. “You know, I’m a person of faith. I believe in good and evil,” he told reporters following a rally in Phoenix. “I think if somehow or another because you’re a person of faith you believe in good and evil is a disqualifier for president we’re going to have a very small pool of candidates who can run for president.” We talk about the speech and why it became the #1 election story last night.

5:00 – Satan and Santorum: Perspective from Reagan’s Evil Empire Speech
The secular world today trembles and shudders at the sight of Rick Santorum speaking on good and evil at Ave Maria University in Florida in 2008. Santorum’s statement came 25 years after another much-maligned social conservative, Ronald Reagan, delivered a similarly fiery speech in Florida in 1983. In both cases, the secular left recoiled in horror, mortified that any American other than Barack Obama or Jimmy Carter might dare remark on matters of faith and state, of the temporal and eternal. Paul Kengor is here to remember Reagan’s “Evil Empire” speech and compare / contrast it with Rick Santorum.

5:20 – On Ordered Liberty: A Treatise on the Free Society
Perhaps no issue is more divisive among philosophers, jurists and theologians than the nature of human liberty. Liberty is central to the claims of the Christian Gospel, the Glorious Revolution of 1688 and the American Revolution. But discussions about the nature of freedom have been characterized by profound disagreement and unsettling questions. What does it mean to be free? Is freedom worth more than mens' lives? Why should man be free? What, if any, legitimate responsibilities accompany freedom? These subjects are that the heart of Samuel Gregg's book On Ordered Liberty. He is with us today.


  1. I too read the article about Santorum and thought, this is news? But I guess for some, Satan's discovery is news. Wow, I really live on a different planet. When I saw his old comment made news, I just simply couldn't figure out what the problem with his comments were. What doe people have a problem with? But I'm slowly coming to the realization that I am the alien, from the planet heaven. I look forward to the trip home, in His time, not mine. This is a strange visit to this planet lately.

    1. Bill O'Reilly had a priest contributor to CBS on his show, The Factor, last night. This priest, Fr. Beck, I believe, announced that Santorum is an evangelical Catholic, completely on the extreme in regard to other Catholics. He said Santorum would lose the Catholic vote because Catholics are "moderate." He was not asked to explain what he believed was extreme, the belief in Satan or on contraception, etc., but I think someone in the media (Al Kresta?) should counter and expose this CBS priest publicly. First, where does this term, "evangelical Catholic" come from? I have never heard it before, but it's insulting to both Evangelicals and Catholics, since he obviously meant it negatively. I would like this priest to publicly explain so his ordinary can hear which beliefs of Santorum are outside Catholic teaching. I listened to most of the long talk that Santorum gave analyzing the decline of academe, the churches, and society, and found it cogently argued and well within the bounds of Catholic Church teaching. O’Reilly called Santorum judgmental for saying that mainline Protestantism had eroded its theology. Is O’Reilly that ignorant of the theological landscape, or does he perhaps disagree with (his) Catholic Church on women and openly active gay priests, abortion, etc.? I fault the priest for knowingly leading the flock astray on a regular basis on his gig as "Catholic" contributor on CBS (can he really be that ignorant of official church teaching?), and O’Reilly for not doing some homework into the history and status of religion and the complex and faith-based context of Santorum’s talk.

    2. I went back and watched this clip on OREILLY. We need to find out who the superior is to this priest. Al, this is exactly the problem we have with the Catholic Brand in America. I'm a marketing guy and the Catholic Brand is being defined by those who the press likes. Pelosi, Biden, Sr. Kehan (sp) Whomever is a liberal Catholic. I can tell the above guy exactly what is meant by Evangelical Catholic. It means orthdox. Someone who follows the faith. This priest was making the point, on a very thin line, that Santorum does not represent mainstream Catholics. To be Catholic means we follow the chair of Peter. HELLO. I'm not inteterested in the mainstream, or even what I think about faith and morals, I'm interested in conforming my mind to the truth, as expressed in His Church PERIOD. This priest was off the reservation. Al, let's find him, and hope he's not under the cover of the few remaining so called liberal bishops or worse yet, under some loosely formed religious order that has been running around in the shadows. Until we are able to removed the Catholic Brand from certain groups, we can't manage what it actually means to be Catholic. The brand is watered down and being defined by a media who lives on division and will play 100 to 1, those who espouse their media religion.

    3. Father Edward Beck ...Here's his recent clarification which I believe is complete opposed to Catholic Teaching and he seems to rely on what the majority of Catholics think instead of what the CHURCH thinks UGH. I'm very tired of these guys....Here's the so called Father's response...

      Let me weigh in and clarify a bit since me appearance on O'Reilly seems to have generated so much "discussion".

      I was asked a specific question: Do I think the way Rick Santorum has expressed his faith and has brought it in to the political conversation will HURT his chances in a general election? My answer was YES, and remains YES. I did not say I disagree with Mr. Santorum on the way he expresses his Catholic faith. I did not call him a "bad" Catholic. I did not endorse someone else over him. As a Catholic priest, I do not endorse political candidates.

      I DID say that I thought Mr. Santorum's unfortunate remarks about SATAN at Ave Maria University in 2008 did not reflect mainstream Catholic thought about Satan and evil in the world. I also stand by that statement. That is not to deny the existence and power of evil in the world. It is to say that to focus on it as an external entity that is somehow trying to destroy our country is misguided and not in line with sound religious principle.

    4. Believing that Satan is real, and hey, let's say look at scripture, which clearly points to the dark one from the very moment of the fall, to Jesus being tempted in the desert....I guess that's not good about many Pope's clearly laying out...he's real. We aren't even suppose to try and talk to those in the 'good' spiritual world nor ask our guardian angel their name for fear of getting a response from the dark side. Where are these priests being educated! And then they make it on the media. I wonder if I could buy a collar, call OREILLY and get on the air. Sorry, again, just SICK of the Catholic Brand being trashed by politicians and now I have to see a priest on TV misrepresent not only what the church says, but have a complete fundamental misunderstand of what it means to be Catholic. We are under a Monarch....the Pope, who we believe is protected in all faith and morals....we do not live in a spiritual democracy. Wow, we have grown so arrogant. I'm very sorry Lord, very sorry for deeply offending you.....I will ponder this tonight at stations......we really continue to kill our Lord!

  2. I look forward to listening to the entire show on philosophy. As a 41 years old Catholic, I went to Ohio State and have an MBA, however, I took one philosophy class that started at deCartes and moved forward. Now, that I'm working on a Masters in theology, I've had to take metaphysics at Francisan and although challenging, I wish I had taken these types of classes earlier. The problem is, philosophy at Ohio State is not philosophy at Franciscan. One must start with Parmendides, and the study of being, and work their way through Plato, Aristotle, then deCartes, Augustine and Auquinas, then Kant and the newer (so called) thinkers. There's no time spent on being at all and the Greeks are ignored. Without this, the entire meaning of three person in one nature is lost. One has to define nature under the concept, as best we can, in being. If we don't know who started us, then we don't know what we are doing now, nor do we know where we are ultimately destined to be. Thanks Ave Maria for making me think!

  3. This is another example that those in the media, particularly on the left, are bigoted enough to try to say people of faith are disqualified from running for office. It's apparently best to stick with a candidate who will trample the Constitution, I guess.