Browse By

Ayatollah Joseph F. Naumann Tries To Take Over Kansas

Roman Catholic Archbishop Joseph F. Naumann has begun a religiously-based coup d’etat in Kansas. He has issued an ultimatum to Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius, telling her that she must impose the Catholic Church’s religious beliefs on all citizens or Kansas, or suffer “additional pastoral actions” – excommunication from the Catholic Church. Naumann spoke to Sebelius, telling her to submit to his authority, and then threw down the gauntlet in his religious publication, accusing Sebelius of disloyalty, in her governmental duties, to her religion:

“The spiritually lethal message, communicated by our governor, as well as many other high-profile Catholics in public life, has been in effect: ‘The church’s teaching on abortion is optional!'”

Let me provide this update to Archbishop Naumann, who may be too busy to keep up with the news: Congress has ratified something called The Bill of Rights, which includes a constitutional amendment that forbids the government establishment of religion. That means, Archbishop Naumann, that the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church do not have the force of law, and that, as far as the Governor of any of the United States of America is concerned, yes, the Catholic Church’s teachings are optional.

It would be a legally appropriate, if personally obnoxious, gesture on Archbishop Naumann’s part if he were to lecture Kathleen Sebelius in private about her actions as a private citizen. However, for Archbishop Naumann to so conspicuously send messages to Sebelius in public about her professional activities as the Governor of Kansas is a highly inappropriate effort to use the power of a tax-exempt organization, the Roman Catholic Church, to influence a public official and make his church a player in Kansas electoral politics.

Archbishop Naumann’s own statement makes his agenda clear: He wants to use his religious power to pressure public government officials into making the Roman Catholic Church’s religious teachings mandatory, not “optional”, for all residents of the state of Kansas.

That makes Joseph F. Naumann an American Ayatollah.

I’m sure that there are many Catholics in Kansas who don’t approve of Naumann’s obnoxious attempts to dictate what the government will do, for Catholics and non-Catholics alike. I suggest that they send Naumann’s office a letter, at 12615 Parallel Parkway, Kansas City, Kansas 66109, reminding him that the Dark Ages ended hundreds of years ago, and advising him that his position as Archbishop is optional.

29 thoughts on “Ayatollah Joseph F. Naumann Tries To Take Over Kansas”

  1. Anonymous says:

    If I’m not mistaken Sebelius is both a Roman Catholic and a public figure with public positions, which means her public positions can be criticized publically. Also, if I’m not mistaken, this is the United States of America and everyone is entitled to their position – even the Roman Catholic Church. That being said, if Sebelius does not agree with the Church’s position on something so fundamental to its moral teaching as the right to life, then she is absolutely free to leave the Church.

    Why is this even considered controversial?

  2. Juniper says:

    Because the Archbishop is telling Sebelius to impose Roman Catholic religious beliefs on everyone in Kansas, and is using the tax-exempt power of his church to influence electoral politics, which is illegal.

    Anonymous, are you willfully misunderstanding?

  3. Another anonymous says:

    The archbishop and the governor are both free to practice their religion without forced sterilization, birth control or abortion as has been practice in China and the eastern block governments in order to curb population growth. This in spite of the cost to taxpayers of unwanted children and families who are expected by the catholic church to produce more and more children when they don’t have the time and money to feed the ones they already have.

    How the archbishop must long for the 15th century and the divine rights of kings, with the popes conveniently interpreting the will of God…back before all that unpleasant “We the people” stuff came along.

  4. Anonymous says:

    To Juniper:

    I believe the Archbishop is simply telling Sebilius to either stop taking communion or change her position on abortion. I’m not sure I would consider this “imposing” Roman Catholic beliefs on the whole state of Kansas. Last I checked, you could come and go as you pleased within the Catholic faith. There are plenty of other denominations and/or faiths that I’m sure would accomodate her.

    I think you’d have a tough time proving your case in court on the illegality of what the Archbishop is doing. But, I wish you all the luck on that one.

  5. Peregrin Wood says:

    No, the Archbishop is not asking Sebelius to change her personal position on abortion. The Archbishop is demanding that Kathleen Sebelius use her power as governor of Kansas to impose Roman Catholic religious beliefs on all citizens of Kansas, both Catholic and non-Catholic.

    What angers Ayatollah Joseph F. Naumann so much is that Kathleen Sebelius has obeyed the Constitution, and not the Roman Catholic Church, and kept obedience to the Catholic Church “optional”.

    Naumann wants to become the dictatorial power behind Kathleen Sebelius, telling her what she must do as Governor, controlling her with his religious authority.

    I applaud Kathleen Sebelius for her opposition to this theocratic coup d’etat.

  6. Anonymous says:

    First, being pro-life is not a strictly Catholic religious belief. There are people of all different kinds of religious or non-religious backgrounds who are pro-life. How you equate advocacy for a pro-life position as imposing the whole of Catholic belief on a population is illogical. It’s simply a position that happens to flow from Catholic religious beliefs…and many other’s beliefs.

    As I said before, Sebilius has the freedom to reject this directive from Nauman, which she probably will. If she continues to receive communion then she has decided to excommunicate herself.

    The Catholic Church is not the law, nothing the Archbishops says can make anyone do anything. So, why do you pretend he has more power than he does? Your position borders on outright hysterics…at the very least it’s dishonest.

  7. Peregrin Wood says:

    Anonymous: “How you equate advocacy for a pro-life position as imposing the whole of Catholic belief on a population is illogical.”

    Reality: That’s not something I did. It’s what Ayatollah Naumann did. He’s not promoting anti-abortionism in general. He’s talking about “The church’s teaching”. Naumann’s complaint is that the Governor of Kansas, AS the Governor, is treating “The church’s teaching” as “optional”.

    Joseph F. Naumann is trying to force Governor Sebelius, through his religious power, to give Roman Catholic religious beliefs the force of law in Kansas. He wants Sebelius to help him make obeying Catholic religious law – his own little sharia – not “optional” in Kansas.

    Why are you so reluctant to admit this? Are you a Kansas Catholic? Are you from Ayatollah Naumann’s office?

    Why the anonymity? Why won’t you tell us who you really are?

  8. Anonymous says:

    Sure, Naumann would love to see people adopt the Church’s teaching, Catholic or otherwise, on abortion. This is because it is his conviction, as well as the teaching of the Catholic Church, that it is an intrinsic evil tantamount to murder. He’s well within his right as an American citizen to hold this view and persuade others to adopt it, just like you have the right to persuade others to your view. In fact, you could start your own 501(c)(3) that promotes the unfettered access to abortion if you so choose. Furthermore, you could even restrict membership to those who only hold your position, and take actions that might exclude those who have an opinion at variance with your own as long as it’s within the law. (Can I write for your blog?)

    Considering that Sebilius is a Catholic within the Archdiocese of KCK, she falls within the pastoral flock of Archbishop Naumann. As her pastor he has a pastoral obligation to teach her the faith. From what I’ve read he has spoken with her privately on several occasions on the topic of her pro-abortion stance. Because she continues to take communion as if she is in good standing with the Church, after she’s been asked on several occasions to stop taking communion, Naumann has decided to take a more public stance (because of her very public position) so that other Catholics and non-Catholics aren’t confused about the Church’s teaching on abortion.

    Sebilius because she’s not only the Governor of KS, who represents the state, but who is also a very prominent Catholic, has an obligation if she wants to remain Catholic, to try and uphold its teachings, and not advocate positions like abortion which are considered gravely immoral by the Church.

    You’re argument, especially with the use of words like “religious power” and “force” makes the Archbishop sound like some sort of Jedi Knight with superhuman powers to coerce public officials – as if Sebilius is some weak minded individual with no brain of her own.

    I’m flattered that you think I’m some covert operative from the Archbishop’s office (or even someone with a name you could research) sent out to do rhetorical battle with pro-abortionists. Nope, just an unimportant guy that stumbled upon your blog. I don’t live in Kansas either.

  9. Peregrin Wood says:

    You are wrong, Anonymous.

    As Governor, Kathleen Sebelius has NO OBLIGATION to obey the Catholic Church.

    It’s a shame you and the Archbishop Ayatollah think she does. You seem to have forgotten that we do not live in Medieval Europe, with the religious wars to enforce Catholic dogma of the time. What a great success THAT was.

    Ayatollah Naumann has no supernatural power. What he DOES have is considerable political power, which he has gathered through his religious organization, which is able to maintain considerable wealth in spite of sex abuse lawsuits through its tax exempt status. Naumann is now using that religious power to try to control the Governor of Kansas, both through the threat of excommunication AND through the threat of organizing voters against the Governor, which is absolutely against the law for any tax exempt organization, religious or not, to do.

    This issue is not about what Ayatollah Naumann “would love to see”. That’s his personal opinion, which is his own business. This is about how Naumann is violating the law in order to try to take control over Kansas state government to promote his religion’s beliefs above all others.

  10. kevin says:

    well, yeah, The guy with the funny hat is pressuring the Gov becuase he wants her to do want he wants.

    If she dosen’t, he will kick her out of the special “we’re catholic our god loves us club”

    So what do you expect? The mythbelievers are stong and are trying to impose their desires on everyone else in the country. This have been going on for a while, and each person must decide if they want to live in a theocracy.

    If she caves in to the demands, vote her out. Vote to remove the TAX EXEMPTION enjoys by the myth believers’ leaders and apply zoning laws to restrict their activities.

    Remember “god kills!” and we need to stop the preachers of hate!

  11. Anonymous says:

    She has no LEGAL obligation to follow the Catholic Church, but no one is arguing that.

    Seriously, if you truly want the American public to follow your faulty reasoning on what tax-exempt organization can or cannot do, you better kiss all your pet tax-exempt political organizations that promote your political agenda good bye. It works both ways. You better read up on exactly what they can and can’t do.

    In a nutshell a tax-exempt organization can’t campaign for or against a particular candidate or raise money for them. What they can do is advocate and/or criticize certain positions. If you can find me one article that quotes Naumann saying, “Don’t vote for Sebelius or else…” I’d love to see it.

  12. Peregrin Wood says:

    Actually, Anonymous, that’s exactly what Ayatollah Joseph F. Naumann is arguing. He’s arguing that people in Kansas do not have the “option” to disobey the orders of the Catholic Church. He’s also arguing that he has the right to issue commands to the Governor of Kansas.

    And Ayatollah Naumann IS naming names in his religious publication.

    Why are you such a big fan of theocracy? Are you dying to have more holy wars, like the last time the Catholic Church mixed itself up in the state?

  13. Anonymous says:

    I think any reasonable person, without an ideological ax to grind and/or a hatred for the Catholic Church, can read the above comments and come to the conclusion that you’re being willfully ignorant.

  14. Peregrin Wood says:

    Anonymous, I think they can see that you’re repeatedly confronted with what Ayatollah Joseph F. Naumann is up to: That he’s trying to use the religious power of his tax-exempt church for the purposes of seizing power over the Kansas state government. They can see that you’ve stopped even trying to deny that this is taking place, and so are turning to vague, statements that claim I’m ignorant without actually proving it.

  15. Catholic4ever says:

    Way to go Archbishop.

    Note to Peregrin: Thou Shall not Kill informs Bill of Rights — not the other way around. Your attitude is just, oh so Americentric!

  16. Fruktata says:

    You really believe that the United States is a nation where Christian religious law should have more power than the Bill of Rights? You’re in favor of this American Ayatollah, then.

    By the way – you’ll only be Catholic4ever until you die. Then you’ll be compost4ever.

  17. Joe says:

    If only your spineless clowns were so willing to openly condemn Islamic Terrorists we could all be friends.

  18. Jim says:

    We have, but alas our spineless clowns have not. We have to keep them in the basement on rigid-backed boards in order to keep them from dripping down the drain between shows, which understandably keeps them from making public political statements.

  19. Joe says:

    “Your” refers to political/public heads of “your” party. It must be embarrassing to be constantly wrong. Stick to stupid posts they are much more becoming than your ignorant comments.

  20. Jim says:

    It must be embarrassing to assume incorrectly yet again that I’m a Democrat.

    Pardon me, I need to go water my clowns.

  21. Joe says:

    Never assumed you were a Democrat either Jim. Does it say Democrat? I imagine you smugly typing these messages thinking..”Ahh this is a good slam, Yes, Clowns thats funny!” Inevitably though it’s not.

    Since you have been 18 other than the odd time you voted for a third party socialist or communist have you ever voted outside the left? Since you stated your not a democrat.

  22. Ralph says:

    Under the freedom of speech clause of the First Amendment, Archbishop Naumann certainly has a right to say whatever he wants. I don’t think he has committed a crime, and I’d hate to see his freedom of speech attacked by the government.

    James Hagee, Jeremiah Wright–and all the other religious nuts who have somehow gotten press coverage with their silly rants and their opponents’ guilt-by-association machinations–have a perfect right to say what they want too.

    It in no way infringes on Archbishop Naumann’s right to free speech for someone else to say what is abundantly clear: Archbishop Naumann is attempting to use religious power to subvert American democracy.

    This is a carefully targeted repeat of a conservative Catholic political maneuver from 2004–threatening to deny communion to politicians who support abortion rights. It is precisely timed and focused to put pressure on a possible vice-presidential candidate.

    This is NOT a theological affirmation of Catholic “pro-life” doctrine. It ignores the Catholic Church’s “pro-life” stances against the Iraq war and the death penalty. No American politician has ever been threatened by a Catholic Archbishop with denial of communion on the basis of these “life” issues.

  23. David C. Gross says:

    I wonder if some of the ignorant intolerant people who have posted about this are aware of Internal Revenue Tax Code 501(C)3. Under this part of the tax code a church is forbidden to involve itself in other then issue advocacy. By trying to force Gov. Sebelius to do as ayatollah Naumann demands and that is what he is trying to do. A Church entity is NOT allowed to try to force their particular religious views on the people of the United States, but sadly ayatollah Naumann seems to be trying to do just that and for that he should be strongly and publicly rebuked and replaced by Holy Father for clearly and illegally overstepping the proper bounds of his authority. That is why our wise forefathers made sure that there was a strong wall between church and state.

  24. Aaron says:

    The Archbishop is simply doing his job as a pastor. Anyone who is a state of grave sin should not receive Holy Communion. He is just speaking the truth.

    1. Snubbins says:

      The Bible says not to kill, Aaron. It says to turn the other cheek instead of fighting. Violence in the Bible is supposed to be a grave sin.

      So why isn’t the Archbishop refusing Communion to soldiers? Why isn’t the Archbishop refusing Communion to politicians who support military funding and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq?

      That wouldn’t be politically convenient, would it?

  25. HareTrinity says:

    Bible’s pretty pro-abortion if anything, to be fair.

    Much as I appreciate groups helping to recognise that “when life starts” is an issue of debate, and that abortions do need regulation, I can’t see how it’s a particularly religious issue, and thus it makes sense to call it an optional teaching.

  26. HareTrinity says:

    There’s another link with a deeper look into abortion, mentioning that it WAS carried out at the time as well as taking a deeper look into the wording of verses that could be argued to relate to abortion.

  27. Anonymous says:

    I was raised Roman Catholic, I did not agree with all that I was taught, therefore I have refrained from receiving Communion in the church for over 30 years. I feel the Governor should have the same respect for the organization that she claims to be a member of. It is NOT an option to be an abortionist and a Catholic. It’s really that simple.

    1. Peregrin Wood says:

      But, Anonymous, she is not an “abortionist”. She doesn’t perform them. What she does is administer the government of the state of Kansas. What Ayatollah Naumann is asking for is not a change of her personal opinion. Ayatollah Naumann is demanding that Sebelius use her power to change the government of Kansas to suit the fancy of the Catholic Church.

      Under the Constitution of the United States, that is not an option. It’s theocracy.

      What will Ayatollah Naumann order Sebelius to do next? Is she to be his puppet, just because she’s Catholic?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Psst... what kind of person doesn't support pacifism?

Fight the Republican beast!