Return to Home Page

What Religious Liberty?
The Incredible Ever-Expanding Dead End
Anti-Cure, Anti-Life
Whose Values in Education?
Toppling Dominos
Anti-Christians don't have to be Hypocrites but Many Volunteer
Intolerant Tolerance
The Emperor's Clothes or a Cheap Tuxedo
The Myth of Hitler's Pope, Part I
The Myth of Hitler's Pope, Part II
Embryonic Stem Cell Research Again
The Madness of Secularism
"Don't Impose Your Religion on Me"
Dictatorship of Relativism
Two Babies at Christmas
Living Will or Death Warrant?
Court Ordered Slow Motion Torture-Death Sentence
Men in Black
A Lot of Hot Air
The Culture War Battles
"Stay with us, Lord"
Secular-to-English Dictionary
Moral Guidance for Catholics in this Election
Christians Losing America
Stem Cell Wars
Catholic Pro-Abortion Politicians and Communion
Useful Idiots
Who Killed Jesus?
A Primer on Gay Marriage
Whose Side are You on?
Vouchers Revisited
Real and Fake Cloning Bans
Broken Compasses
No Room in the Inn
Killing Fields Revisited
Gay but not Merry
Adam and Steve?
The Battle for the Court
Victimless Crimes
More Salt, Please
The Next Big Fight
When Religion Becomes Evil
Virginity Making a Comeback?
You've Come a Long Way, Baby
The Incarnational Approach
The Many Meanings of ACLU
Things Your Media Never Told You
A Nasty Little Secret
Two Points of View on the Birth of Jesus
You Gotta Kill Them.  How Else Are They Going To Learn?
Perplexing Christmas Questions
How Do You See Christ Today?
Now that there is Another Ewe, will there be Another You?
What is Conscience Anyhow?
Divorce of Love and Life
What Counts as a Mass?
What is a Covenant?
I Wish I had Your Faith
Are there Too Many Decrees of Nullity?
Dutch Treats
Ecumenism
Going from Baby Doe to Granny Doe
Comments of Evangelium Vitae
The Exception Corrupts the Rule
Good Morality or Good Medicine
Generation-X'ers Smart in Every Way But One
A Matter of Good Breeding
Herod and Pontius Pilate at the Polls
Hitler's Pope or Righteous Gentile?
The Unknown God
What exactly is wrong with homosexuality?
Ideology Trumps Science, Reality, and Common Sense
What Exactly is an Indulgence?
Infallibility and Error in the Church
Pilate Asked, "What is Truth?"
The Truth about Families
New Killing Fields
Choice of Language and Language of Choice
A Lexicon for Our Day
Why are there so many bodies?
Marijuana, Medicine or Menace?
Medical Research and Ethics
Meditation
"You Taught me well, Mommie dearest"
Moral Fallout
Neutral on the Wrong Side
"These are the Nineties After All"
Many are Wed but Few are Married
"...Prepare him for additional obligations"
A Useful Lie
A Partridge in a Pear Tree
Religious Persecution in the U.S.?
What Makes a Person a Person?
The Point of a Point of View
Politically Correct, Morally Depraved
Population Controllers out of Control
Practical Dreamers
Social Progress through Immorality
Shall we Do Evil for Goodness Sake?
Reason and Faith
Resurrection Glory
Same Sex Marriages?
Pearl of Great Price
"I used to be schizophrenic, but we're all right now"
Sexual Morality Irrelevant in Judging Public Officials?
Undesirable Side Effects
Some News is Good News
SOSSLQ's, not POSSLQ's
Spoils of Splits
Why Attend Mass Every Sunday?
Is it All Right to Pull the Plug?
An Appeal for Intolerance
Topics Catechetical
A Voting Catechism
A Moral Guide to Voting
Vouchers: Has Their Time Come?
What Child is This?
What did they die of?
You are the Man
You may be a liberal if...
Get Rid of that Worthless Relative
Planned Un-Parenthood
Weighing Pro-Life Issues Prior to Voting

by Monsignor James C. Brunner

Faith Points

Whether or not President will be or should be impeached is a political matter that is now in the hands of the Judiciary Committee of the House of Representatives. As a citizen I have a position on what I hope to see done in this respect, but here I am concerned only with moral issues related to the matter. In my opinion, the moral damage from the Lewinsky affair has been extensive. First, the President’s defenders deny that perjury concerning sex is really a serious thing. Trivializing perjury cannot give comfort to moralists and I will suggest such an attitude is also a danger to the legal system. Second, we are told that moral probity in the President, while perhaps desirable, is not a requirement for effective fulfillment of that office. Third, we are told that no effective punishment should apply to the President because past Presidents have been guilty of immorality. Fourth, we should not expend energy on this matter and get on with the really serious problems of the country. I ask you to look with me at each of these points from a moral perspective.

The President’s apologists tell us that perjury to cover up sexual indiscretion is perfectly natural and is certainly inadequate grounds to impeach a President. While I tend to disagree with the premise since it trivializes the sin of calling God to witness to a lie, it is clear that marital infidelity is not the main issue here. It’s the perjury, stupid— to paraphrase a famous campaign slogan. Courts do not take perjury even in civil cases lightly nor should they. Judge Gerald Tjyoflat reviewed a lower court decision giving a mild punishment for perjury since it only occurred in a civil and not a criminal trial. He increased the penalty and justified his action with the words: "Perjury, regardless of the setting, is a serious offense that results in incalculable harm to the functioning of the legal system, as well as to private individuals." Court decisions based on perjured testimony can unjustly ruin lives, reputations, and fortunes. Morally perjury in a civil trial is not less serious than in a criminal trial. Lawyers who perjure themselves can be disbarred, and both they and ordinary citizens can be fined, and even jailed. Is it excessive to require one who is the chief executor of our laws to adhere to the same standard? Does America want a sort of divine right of Presidents to trump laws that they find inconvenient or embarrassing? Do we want a lex rex (The king is above the law because he is the law)? Why should we just "put behind us" the alleged presidential trampling of the laws on perjury? If Presidents are not held to at least the same standard of conduct as ordinary citizens, we will no longer be a nation of laws but of men. And, on the subject of "putting this behind us," I can assume that every felon in a dock is sorry and would like to get on with his life without the unpleasantness of trial and punishment.

A pilot who is an adulterer and pathological liar can still pilot an aircraft. Why should the President not be able to run the country just as well? The analogy has as much relevance as the statement that being an adulterer and liar do not prevent someone from reciting the alphabet successfully. Piloting is a mechanical skill that ordinarily does not entail setting or taking positions on values. The president by contrast must be a moral model because he needs moral suasion in such areas as race relations, fairness in the marketplace, eliciting sacrifice even of life in defense of freedom. One who is not a respected moral leader is greatly diminished in this respect. After the Lewinsky revelations the President had occasion to speak to schoolchildren. Was he the only one unconscious of the double entendres in his urging the students to be disciplined and responsible?

In terms of giving example Mr. Rich Davis of Lawrence, Kansas sums up the situation well in the Letters to the Editor in the Washington Post:

"If actions speak louder than words, here is what our children can learn from our President:

‘Tis better to receive than give.’

Honesty is not the best policy.

Rules are for losers.

Certain kinds of lies are necessary and wise.

Never accept responsibility for your wrongdoing.

Character doesn’t matter.

Anything goes if you’re not caught.

A clever lie is admirable.

Corruption is a relative concept.

Sex has nothing to do with love.

Cheaters usually prosper.

Being popular is the single most important thing in life.

Delayed gratification is stupid.

Apologies serve as punishment."

The moral attitude displayed above seems to be the guiding principles for a great deal of our population who are unable to comprehend why presidential misbehavior is causing such a stir. This fetid pool of immoral principles produces poisonous flowers of which the transgressions of the President are currently the most prominent. Not only is the President’s conduct on trial but so is the moral system that attempts to justify it. Indeed once the presuppositions of the President’s defenders are stated in their starkness as they are by Mr. Davis it is easy to recognize how corrupt they are.

Everybody does it, the presidential partisans tell us. Roosevelt and Kennedy it seems were effective presidents even though historians assure us that they were also guilty of sexual indiscretions. That may be true, but there is no historical record that either of the two gentlemen lied about it under oath. The best place to hide a leaf is in the forest, the saying goes, and persons try to hide the malice of evil the same way: Everybody is doing it. The book of Exodus is pertinent here: "Neither shall you allege the example of the many as an excuse for doing wrong, nor shall you, when testifying in lawsuit, side with the many in perverting justice" (Exod. 23:2).

There are more pressing problems confronting the country. Why do we not get on with those? I submit that preventing courts from being perverted by diminishing the seriousness of perjury and punishing wrongdoing that has the capacity of changing our country from a land governed by laws instead of by men is a serious business and should be attended to promptly.

The extent of political damage to the President has yet to be determined. But there is already a great deal of moral damage irrespective of how the matter of impeachment is disposed.