Bishop Responds to Madness in Madison (Part 2 - School Closing)

Bishop Morlino at a Pro-Life Event
(Wisconsin State Journal Archives)

The other day I did a review of Bishop Joseph Morlino's letter in 2010 to a lay-led revolt over some traditional priests he brought in to help out given the priest shortage.

After investigating the complaints, especially at St. Mary's in Platteville where there was also a school, the bishop explained that the priests were operating within a range of permissible options, and not guilty of working against Vatican II.   Bishop Morlino said in his letter that the priests were staying and the people needed to be mindful that calumny and gossip were gravely sinful.

In this post, we look at how people responded to that 2010 letter. 

The lay people decided to take it up a notch and withhold donations.  St. Mary's relied on part of it's Sunday collection to keep the school afloat.  The Wisconsin State Journal explained back in November of 2010:

The 75-year-old St. Mary's Catholic School is subsidized by the church, which has seen weekly donations fall more than 50 percent in four months, said Myron Tranel, chairman of the church's finance council.  

Rev. John Del Piore of St. Mary's School talks to students
in the hallway in 2010 (Wisconsin State Journal)

The school, with 106 K-8 students, has enough money to operate until at least January but needs an additional $200,000 to keep the facility open through the end of the school year, he said.  

The financial crisis coincides with Madison Bishop Robert Morlino's decision in June to bring in three priests from the Society of Jesus Christ the Priest to lead the parish. The group is based in Spain and known for traditionalist liturgy and devotion to orthodox Catholic teaching. 

[snip]  

Morlino invited priests from the Spanish society to begin serving in the diocese in 2006, primarily in the Sauk City area. There are now eight society priests serving seven churches.  

Their arrival at each church has ushered in similar changes. They reserve the altar server role to boys to encourage more seminarians. They eliminate participation by laypeople in the distribution of communion. And they preach homilies that supporters find refreshingly forthright in stressing Catholic teaching but critics find short on compassion.  

While opposition to the priests has surfaced in other parishes, it has become particularly loud in Platteville, a city of 10,500 people 75 miles southwest of Madison. Fay Stone, a 25-year St. Mary's member, said the priests' decision-making approach seems heavy handed to her. While the Catholic church is not a democracy, some degree of collaboration with parishioners would be nice, she said.  

[snip]  

The priests do retain considerable support in the church.  

"They're teaching morals, and that's what we need," said Barbara Splinter, a 45-year member. "They are following what I've read the pope is for, and he's our leader, so I don't know why people have a problem with it."  

The priests are "being treated very terribly," she added.  

Mike Worachek said he's disappointed that his fellow parishioners aren't giving the priests a chance. "I think people should grow up and face the reality that people are different and you have to accept them for what they are," he said.

Loss of donations has led to the closure of the school. 

That brings us to Bishop Morlino's letter of last week, which explains why it is being closed, and warns people about potential canonical consequences for some behaviors.  News accounts are brushing over some interesting points, especially secular news sources.   The letter is somewhat long to begin looking at in this post and I would hate to skimp on discussion in an effort to keep it short.  This, along with the last post, provides some good background ahead of disgesting what came next.

---

For interesting news items I don't have time to blog on, check out my Twitter Feed: @TeDeumBlog

Te Deum Laudamus! Home

The obedient are not held captive by Holy Mother Church; it is the disobedient who are held captive by the world!

Note: The recommended links below are automatically generated by the tool, so they are not necessarily related content.

Bishop Responds to Madness in Madison (Part 1: 2010 Review)

Bishop Robert C. Morlino

I'm going to break this post up into two parts.  In this first part, we are going to revisit what happened in the Diocese of Madison, Wisconsin back in 2010.  In part two, we will look closer at what happened last month and, in between those years.


I've been following this case since Bishop Morlino issued a public statement in the fall of 2010. It concerns some priests he brought to the area in 2006 from the Society of Jesus Christ the Priest, based in Spain.  There's a priest shortage in many dioceses so some bishops are reaching out across the world to fill slots - no surprise here.  Sometimes there will be culture clashes, but did not the Apostles go off to foreign lands to spread the Gospel? These priests are more traditional and celebrate both the old and new forms of the Mass. They are educators and there is a school involved - St. Mary's in Platteville.  They are known to foster vocations.  Some people there didn't like the changes they made, nor did they like the orthodoxy that came with these priests.  Thankfully, the bishop defended their right to act within a certain range of options.


In 2010, some people protested by writing letters to the Apostolic Nuncio demanding the removal of these priests.  Bishop Morlino responded:

I am in receipt of your October 8, 2010 letter and petition. I am grateful that you have approached me with your concern, and I certainly recognize and respect your right to do so (Code of Canon Law, c. 212, §§2-3). By means of this letter I am replying to what you requested, namely, the “immediate removal of the priests of the Society of Jesus Christ the Priest from St. Mary and St. Augustine parishes in Platteville.” A number of you have written to the Apostolic Nuncio about this matter. He has forwarded the letters to me after having read them. He asked that I inform you that he has forwarded these letters to me for my pastoral consideration, since the responsibility for priestly assignments rests with the diocesan bishop.

The faithful have a right to take their concerns to the Sacred Pastors, but they are following canon law which must be in harmony with the Gospel.  Priests have rights.  Too many stories over the years show bishops caving in to the demands of lay people and just shuffling priests around.  In many parishes, this has created spoiled brats who throw temper-tantrums when priests - acting within a range of permitted options on liturgy and other things - are derided.  People confuse these options in such a way as to construe them as immoral or unethical.


After explaining what a serious matter it is to have a priest removed from a parish, Bishop Morlino continues:

I have found that much of what has been said amounts to opinion, misunderstanding, and rumor rather than fact. Nonetheless, after carefully weighing all of your reasons for the proposed removal, I have decided to keep Rev. Lope Pascual, Rev. John Del Priore, and Rev. Miguel Galvez in their current priestly ministry at St. Mary and St. Augustine parishes in Platteville. Their charisms for Catholic education and vocations will serve the people of Platteville very well, and they have my full support. 

He then goes on to explain the respect that is due to the priests of that parish, reminding them that they should always first approach them.  Bishop Morlino next gives his judgment on the concerns he looked at in that 2010 letter.

It grieves me to acknowledge that the reputation of three happy, holy, and hardworking priests has been seriously tarnished by rumor, gossip, and calumny (lying with the intent to damage another’s good name) by some within the parish community. Such conduct is gravely sinful, since some parishioners have been driven by fear, anger, or both, to distance themselves from their priests and even the Sacraments. This situation must cease, and charity must prevail on the part of all. 

Before asking the people to give the priests some time and reassuring them of their good will, he writes:

Furthermore, activities such as protest-letter-writing seminars, leafleting of motor vehicles, door- to-door canvassing for signatures on a petition, etc (that is, exerting organized political pressure on people, where the end justifies any means) is an appropriate tactic in a political campaign, but not in the communion of faith which is the Catholic Church. Groups such as “Call to Action” and “Voice of the Faithful” regularly employ such tactics against legitimate authority in the Church. Because these groups dissent from basic tenets of Catholic Doctrine and Discipline, they are not recognized as Catholic in the Diocese of Madison, much less are they able to exercise legitimate authority. It is my hope that these clarifications will prove helpful.   

Bishop Morlino then supplies an addendum where he addresses the chief concerns, in detail.  They complained about the priests engaging in pre-Vatican II things, but the bishop responded:

First of all, it is necessary for us to appreciate the eloquent teaching of His Holiness, Pope Benedict XVI regarding the false dichotomy between the pre-Vatican II and post-Vatican II Church. 

Bishop Morlino Catechizes on the Finer Points in 2010 in the Addendum


There were several areas he touched on.  I was floored to see that one of the complaints was about priests making visits to the sick with Communion rather than having lay EMHC's do it.  A lay person can bring Holy Communion to someone every day for years but, that person cannot hear Confessions or anoint the sick.  I wonder how many EMHC's even ask those receiving if they would like a confessor to come.   The Sacrament is in disuse within the parish itself; how much less in a nursing home where people are at death's door? The elderly, whose souls are every bit as precious to God as that of babies, are in greater need of pastoral care than anyone. They are isolated, sick and in pain, and it is easy to fall into despair.  


Who in their right mind complains about priests taking the Sacramental visits to the sick upon themselves?  And, what prevents those same lay people from stopping in to visit the sick, and to pray with them?  This can be done daily or weekly. Now, this arrangement may very well result in fewer visits, but those people are getting quality, Sacramental visits.   This is how life is at Assumption Grotto.  We have no EMHC's and lay people do not take Holy Communion to anyone; rather, the priests and deacon do it.  Sick people are dispensed from weekly obligations and there is a regular schedule for the sick and homebound placed on the list, but it is not weekly.  Plus, the priests will go to those who request a Sacramental visit outside of that schedule. I know many parishioners who had priests show up, in the middle of the night if needed, for anointing and Apostolic Pardon when death was imminent. I am deeply grateful that my own mother was among those who received this care from priests willing to be sleep deprived to usher that soul to God as cleanly as possible.


Among other topics that Bishop Morlino catechized the faithful on were complaints about all male altar servers and about what the priests said at funerals.  Using females is optional and no pastor can be forced to use them.  My perception is that younger priests are slowly changing the mix back to all male, just based on a number of stories in recent years.  Here too, I can imagine it being consistent with what we get at Assumption Grotto.  On funerals, they are not celebrations of the life of the departed.  We are praying for their eternal soul.  Most souls, if they died without unrepentant mortal sin, will land in purgatory, where there is great suffering brought on by purgation of all that is not pure.  It is an act of mercy to pray for the dead, to hasten their exit from purgatory and entrance into heaven.  Most people expect a funeral Mass to comfort them as opposed to comforting the dead with heartfelt prayers for them. The use of the 1962 Missal has grown at funerals at Assumption Grotto due to the depth of this clear emphasis in those prayers.  They are beautiful and it is how I wish to be buried, now that I  understand this whole thing better.


Go read the full 2010 statement with addendum.  It is very catechetical.  Also, you will see that Bishop Morlino did was not being heavy handed; he was instructing the faithful in the Catholic faith - something that, out of false charity, had been denied them - probably for decades.  We see with the recent Doctrinal Assessment out of the Holy See on the dissenting Leadership Conference of Women Religious, that teaching a proper orientation on the Catholic faith may be neglected no more.


In part two, we will look closer at what happened in between 2010 and through 2012.  I will supply a link in the combox here when that is done, and the post will have appropriate links to diocesan communications, so there is no need for anyone to drop that in here.

Bishop Morlino with Seminarians

---

For interesting news items I don't have time to blog on, check out my Twitter Feed: @TeDeumBlog

Te Deum Laudamus! Home

The obedient are not held captive by Holy Mother Church; it is the disobedient who are held captive by the world!

Note: The recommended links below are automatically generated by the tool, so they are not necessarily related content.

Bishop Lori: Absurd for someone to expect a ham sandwich in a kosher deli

Check this out...

In one of the latest salvos Bishop William Lori, chairman of the Ad Hoc Committee on Religious Liberty of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), appeared before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

In his testimony today, he likened the imposition on Catholic institutions to include insurance coverage for contraception and sterilization to mandating that all Jewish delis should serve pork. 

People recognize, he said that "it is absurd for someone to come into a kosher deli and demand a ham sandwich." Moreover, "it is downright surreal to apply this coercive power when the customer can get the same sandwich cheaply, or even free, just a few doors down."

Source: Zenit

---

For interesting news items I don't have time to blog on, check out my Twitter Feed: @TeDeumBlog

Te Deum Laudamus! Home

The obedient are not held captive by Holy Mother Church; it is the disobedient who are held captive by the world!

Note: The recommended links below are automatically generated by the tool, so they are not necessarily related content.

USCCB to Obama: Rescission of mandate only complete solution

Well that didn't take long. The USCCB has issued it's formal statement response to President Obama's "accommodation" on the HHS mandate (Emphasis in bold in original)

February 10, 2012
Regulatory changes limited and unclear
Rescission of mandate only complete solution
Continue urging passage of Respect for Rights of Conscience Act

WASHINGTON – The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) have issued the following statement:

The Catholic bishops have long supported access to life-affirming healthcare for all, and the conscience rights of everyone involved in the complex process of providing that healthcare. That is why we raised two serious objections to the "preventive services" regulation issued by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) in August 2011.

First, we objected to the rule forcing private health plans — nationwide, by the stroke of a bureaucrat's pen—to cover sterilization and contraception, including drugs that may cause abortion. All the other mandated "preventive services" prevent disease, and pregnancy is not a disease. Moreover, forcing plans to cover abortifacients violates existing federal conscience laws. Therefore, we called for the rescission of the mandate altogether.

Second, we explained that the mandate would impose a burden of unprecedented reach and severity on the consciences of those who consider such "services" immoral: insurers forced to write policies including this coverage; employers and schools forced to sponsor and subsidize the coverage; and individual employees and students forced to pay premiums for the coverage. We therefore urged HHS, if it insisted on keeping the mandate, to provide a conscience exemption for all of these stakeholders—not just the extremely small subset of "religious employers" that HHS proposed to exempt initially.

Today, the President has done two things.

First, he has decided to retain HHS's nationwide mandate of insurance coverage of sterilization and contraception, including some abortifacients. This is both unsupported in the law and remains a grave moral concern. We cannot fail to reiterate this, even as so many would focus exclusively on the question of religious liberty.

Second, the President has announced some changes in how that mandate will be administered, which is still unclear in its details. As far as we can tell at this point, the change appears to have the following basic contours:

·It would still mandate that all insurers must include coverage for the objectionable services in all the policies they would write. At this point, it would appear that self-insuring religious employers, and religious insurance companies, are not exempt from this mandate.

·It would allow non-profit, religious employers to declare that they do not offer such coverage. But the employee and insurer may separately agree to add that coverage. The employee would not have to pay any additional amount to obtain this coverage, and the coverage would be provided as a part of the employer's policy, not as a separate rider.

·Finally, we are told that the one-year extension on the effective date (from August 1, 2012 to August 1, 2013) is available to any non-profit religious employer who desires it, without any government application or approval process.

These changes require careful moral analysis, and moreover, appear subject to some measure of change. But we note at the outset that the lack of clear protection for key stakeholders—for self-insured religious employers; for religious and secular for-profit employers; for secular non-profit employers; for religious insurers; and for individuals—is unacceptable and must be corrected. And in the case where the employee and insurer agree to add the objectionable coverage, that coverage is still provided as a part of the objecting employer's plan, financed in the same way as the rest of the coverage offered by the objecting employer. This, too, raises serious moral concerns.

We just received information about this proposal for the first time this morning; we were not consulted in advance. Some information we have is in writing and some is oral. We will, of course, continue to press for the greatest conscience protection we can secure from the Executive Branch. But stepping away from the particulars, we note that today's proposal continues to involve needless government intrusion in the internal governance of religious institutions, and to threaten government coercion of religious people and groups to violate their most deeply held convictions. In a nation dedicated to religious liberty as its first and founding principle, we should not be limited to negotiating within these parameters. The only complete solution to this religious liberty problem is for HHS to rescind the mandate of these objectionable services. [emphasis mine]

We will therefore continue—with no less vigor, no less sense of urgency—our efforts to correct this problem through the other two branches of government. For example, we renew our call on Congress to pass, and the Administration to sign, the Respect for Rights of Conscience Act. And we renew our call to the Catholic faithful, and to all our fellow Americans, to join together in this effort to protect religious liberty and freedom of conscience for all.

Rocco Palmo at Whispers has obtained an internal memo with more.  He notes the signatories:

Here below, however, the text of the internal letter to the bishops -- obtained tonight by Whispers -- and signed by the aforementioned quintet: the conference president, Cardinal-designate Timothy Dolan of New York, and the bench's committee chairs for Pro-Life Activities, Cardinal Daniel DiNardo of Galveston-Houston; Doctrine, Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington; Domestic Policy, Bishop Stephen Blaire of Stockton, and the newly-formed arm on Religious Liberty, Bishop William Lori of Bridgeport.

Here's just one snippet:

We remain fully committed to the defense of our religious liberty and we strongly protest the violation of our freedom of religion that has not been addressed. We continue to work for the repeal of the mandate. We have grave reservations that the government is intruding in the definition of who is and who is not a religious employer. Upon further study we are very concerned that serious issues still remain and we have found numerous problems which we will raise in this letter.

Hold on tight folks, we're in for a ride.  The bishops have found their voice, and their backbone.  Pray for them, and all involved.

Phil Lawler laments the fact that Catholic Health Association and Catholic Charities jumped the gun and issued statements supportive of the "accommodation" before the bishops could speak, something I discussed in my own post on Sr. Carol Keehan.  Father Z wondered how it was that Sr. Keehan of Catholic Health Association could support Obama's "plan B" before Obama even had his press conference. Elizabeth Scalia points out that there was pretty interesting timing of Sr. Keehan's statement which went out over the White House religion portal (hello?!?!?)

Dissenting Catholics serving in political roles, heading various institutions, etc., have been competing with the US bishops for decades, but it's been intensifying.  It's the Magisterium versus the pseudo-magisterium.

Days ago, Canonist Ed Peters re-iterated his call for bishops to start using Canon 915 as it was intended, saying that public behavior deserves public consequences. 

Tonight, Dr. Jeff Mirus at Catholic Culture is discussing excommunication, as are others.

UPDATE: The New York Times is reporting on how this all came about.  If this is true, I'm wondering how long it will be before Sebelius is thrown overboard (HT Deacon Greg)

---

For interesting news items I don't have time to blog on, check out my Twitter Feed: @TeDeumBlog

Te Deum Laudamus! Home

The obedient are not held captive by Holy Mother Church; it is the disobedient who are held captive by the world!

Note: The recommended links below are automatically generated by the tool, so they are not necessarily related content.

Bishop Slattery's wholesome response to HHS Mandate; and, my commentary

Bishop Edward Slattery of Tulsa, Oklahoma has offered what may be the most wholesome response to the HHS mandate which violates religious liberty.  I kept checking his website, knowing he would release something in due time, and he did not disappoint.  In his statement, he also discusses the immorality of the services and drugs at the heart of this issue.  Not many Catholics hear this from the pulpit.  You can find text for this video at the Diocese of Tulsa.


My Commentary: Bishops Need to Change Something

Let me preface this by saying that I agree with the many who say this is not about contraception, but about religious liberty.  Hold that thought a moment....

A thought came to me as I listened to Bishop Slattery that something is seriously backwards - not with the Bishop's words, which were great and wholesome.  It was the thought that Catholics are not learning why contraception is considered objectively evil - from the pulpits; rather, they have to stumble on Catholic TV, radio, and internet to find those discussions.  Potential converts sitting in RCIA classes are also taking to the internet to discuss the truth.  In many cases I've seen online, these folks know more about Catholicism and it's teachings on sexual morality than those charged with their instruction!  Still worse, many more Catholics get malformed by the secular media which distorts the authentic teachings of the Church and reduces some important issue to a catchy soundbite, often advancing an irreligious, secularist agenda (and it is why I believe bishops need to get themselves in the secular news more).

Why are Catholics learning more from those sources above (for good, or for evil) than from the pulpits in their parishes and from the office of bishop in their diocese?

Let's face it, the New Evangelization is suppose to involve lay people and lay-led organizations.  No problem there.  But, it should be accompanying teachings that are equal or greater in strength coming from the bishops' offices and priests' pulpits.  The lay-led arm of the New Evangelization (NE) cannot be a replacement which frees-up bishops and priests to talk about the comforting things; rather, NE should augment and support what they teach.  For the last 40+ years, there has been a vacuum.  That vacuum is going to work against the bishops and their efforts to fight the assault on our religious liberty.  This needs to change, and it needs to change fast.

There has been a deafening silence from the pulpit for as long as I can remember.  I could go to Mass 52 Sundays out of the year in any number of local parishes and never hear a word about abortion, contraception cohabitation, or other topics involving sexual morality.  I can tell you when I first heard about these things was soon after joining Assumption Grotto in 2005.  I wasn't offended at hearing the truth; I wanted to learn more and for God's sake, as well as my own, I decided to keep an open mind.  Today, I am aware of a small network of parishes in metro Detroit where these things are taught and they are usually, but not always, led by younger priests who are more concerned with the salvation of souls than with preservation of people's self-esteem. 

Even Jesus would be reassigned by some bishops or priest-assignment-boards these days for making people uncomfortable, no matter how nicely something is taught.   In fact, withholding certain, uncomfortable truths at the pulpit is a way of reassigning Jesus himself.


Why should people who go to Mass every Sunday have to learn from a lay person or online forum that their contraceptive pill is actually an abortifacient which does not allow a fertilized egg, carrying an ensouled person, to attach itself to the uterine wall?  It is not preventing conception, but permitting it, then flushing that new life, authored by God, down the toilet. This is one chief reason the Church considers the use of such pills, gravely sinful.  Humanae Vitae has been out for over 40 years now.  In many parishes, in many dioceses,  you wouldn't even know it existed.  It's time this generation of bishops start teaching and encourage their priests to do the same.  In fact, it is those priests who do teach about it who should be assigned to the large, prime parishes, not those afraid of the white martyrdom needed for the task.


Back to that thought I said to hold: The bishops need to take a wholesome approach to this problem.  They need to go after the religious liberty issue while simultaneously teaching about sexual morality, especially, "the why".  They might start with the 10 Commandments because there are a good many Catholics who believe that the New Testament and Vatican II did away with them.  This may explain why cohabitation, fornication, and adultery are probably at an all time high (and those things lead to contraception, abortion, and  very likely - a dismissive attitude towards the bishops' beef with the Obama Administration over religious liberty).

Remember your leaders who spoke the word of God to you. Consider the outcome of their way of life and imitate their faith. Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever. (Heb 13:7-8)

One more thing: Pray for bishops and priests

---

For interesting news items I don't have time to blog on, check out my Twitter Feed: @TeDeumBlog

Te Deum Laudamus! Home

The obedient are not held captive by Holy Mother Church; it is the disobedient who are held captive by the world!

Note: The recommended links below are automatically generated by the tool, so they are not necessarily related content.

The 1996 Bruskewitz Excommunications: 50,000 letters of support; only 300 negative

Jim Graves at the National Catholic Register (not the dissident "Reporter"), has an excellent story on Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz, 76, of Lincoln, Nebraska.  He is entering his 20th year as bishop of that diocese.  There is some interesting background which then leads into an interview.  One question put forth concerns excommunications he publicized in 1996 (and which were upheld by the Holy See)

Most bishops in the United States haven’t publicized decrees of excommunication. What led you to publicize decrees of excommunication in 1996?

That year I became more famous than I ever intended or wished to be. I issued the decree to clarify that one cannot be a loyal Catholic and a member of certain organizations. Call to Action, for example, advocates homosexual “marriage” and other distortions of Catholic teaching. I said that Catholics had a certain time to withdraw from such organizations or face canonical penalties. 

It hit the national news, and I was interviewed for radio and television programs, such as The Today Show. The reaction I received was overwhelmingly favorable. I received about 50,000 letters of support, versus about 300 negative letters. I’d come home, and I could hardly get into my house, because supporters had sent me bouquets of flowers and baskets of fruit that arrived on my doorstep. Our diocese received a half-million dollars in donations. 

Many bishops privately offered me their support. Some were astonished, but many said what I did was great, even if it wouldn’t work in their part of the world. I never intended it to be an example to others. It was part of my job as shepherd and chief pastor of Lincoln. 

I believe we sometimes have to take steps to move beyond the intellect to motivate the will. Sin is not in the intellect, but the will. We do have to inform people about Church teaching, but once that is done, some choose to be willfully sinful. A great lawyer can know the law but still be a criminal. People can know what is right but do wrong. So, in regards to the excommunications, I believed I had to do something. Sometimes action must be taken.

Read the whole thing: http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/how-bishop-bruskewitz-built-up-the-church-on-the-plains/#ixzz1kuhvfD00

Here is another interview from 1996 by James Likoudis on the excommunications, at EWTN.

Just think how the landscape might be different today if bishops had taken a unified approach with Bishop Bruskewitz in 1996.  Catholics involved with those organizations would know exactly where they stand, and what must be done to regularize their status.  The secular media would not be able to parade people from these organizations in front of other Catholics in an effort to create dissonance.  Ordinary Catholics in the pew who get their "catechesis" from the New York Times would not be scandalized as badly if everyone was clear about the Church's position on these groups.  Furthermore, politicians with agendas that conflict with the natural law and Catholic teaching would not be able to hide behind these people and organizations to mislead Catholic voters.

Let's pray that our bishops change their approach to groups like these in ways that will seriously hinder their ability to undermine the apostolic successors as they have done for decades.  If they operate nationally or internationally, the USCCB ought to have a list of organizations on their website that would make clear to media outlets and politicans those that are out of harmony with the Catholic Church.  It's because these groups seem to enjoy support from some bishops, even if only by their silence about them, that more of the faithful are misled by them.

I really think the HHS mandate has awoken a sleeping giant.  Perhaps God permitted all of these things to happen to light a fire under the seat of bishops' cassocks.

If you want further reading on that, Joan Frawley Desmond has a new article out: Sebelius' Contraception Mandate and the Media


UPDATE:  Here is the statement by Bishop Bruskewitz on the HHS mandate

---

For interesting news items I don't have time to blog on, check out my Twitter Feed: @TeDeumBlog

Te Deum Laudamus! Home

The obedient are not held captive by Holy Mother Church; it is the disobedient who are held captive by the world!

Note: The recommended links below are automatically generated by the tool, so they are not necessarily related content.

Showdown in Twin Cities as Archbishop Nienstedt digs in...

From the StarTribune:

Archbishop John Nienstedt is warning Catholic clergy across Minnesota that there should be no "open dissension" of the church's strong backing of a proposed amendment to the state Constitution that would define marriage as a union only between a man and woman.


In other early signs of the fervent campaign the church intends to wage for the amendment, which will be on every ballot in the state this fall, Nienstedt is appointing priests and married couples to visit archdiocesan high schools to talk about marriage. He has directed parishes to form committees to work for passage of the amendment. He also has warned a priest that he may be stripped of his ministry if he continues to disagree "with the church's teaching on marriage."


In a recent letter to priests and deacons, Nienstedt laid out why he believes it's important that the marriage amendment pass: "The endgame of those who oppose the marriage amendment that we support is not just to secure certain benefits for a particular minority, but, I believe, to eliminate the need for marriage altogether."

[snip]

But there is opposition to the church's strategy. One vocal critic of Nienstedt is the Rev. Mike Tegeder, who spoke against the amendment at a priests' meeting with Nienstedt in October.


In November, Tegeder received a letter stating that if he did not end his public opposition, Nienstedt would suspend his "faculties to exercise ministry" and remove him from his "ministerial assignments."


Marking the first clear standoff over the church's role in the amendment, Tegeder is not backing down.


He said he believes the church is being too political and contends that it's inappropriate for its leaders to campaign in support of the amendment.


"That's not the way to support marriage," said Tegeder, pastor at both St. Frances Cabrini and Gichitwaa Kateri churches in Minneapolis. "If we want to support marriage, there are wonderful things we can do as Catholic churches and ministers. We should not be focused on beating up a small number of people who have this desire to have committed relationships."

Read the full story at the StarTribune: Priests told not to voice dissent

---

For interesting news items I don't have time to blog on, check out my Twitter Feed: @TeDeumBlog

Te Deum Laudamus! Home

The obedient are not held captive by Holy Mother Church; it is the disobedient who are held captive by the world!

Note: The recommended links below are automatically generated by the tool, so they are not necessarily related content.

Bishop Bambera vs. Unversity of Scranton, Round 1

Scranton, Pennsylvania's, Bishop Joseph Bambera officially took the helm in that diocese on April 26, 2010 amidst sudden, and unexpected resignation of Bishop Joseph Martino.   His predecessor regularly butted heads with local Catholic univiersities and other organizations in the firmest possible means for hosting speakers with positions known to be in opposition to Catholic teaching.  He didn't stop there; he took on other sacred cows in a way that was very refreshing to Catholics who were apathetic waiting for bishops to do some bishoping.

The Univeristy of Scranton is hosting a speaker who is known for her pro-abortion activity.  Despite the objections of Bishop Bambera, the unversity is following through with her participation.   Below is the statement just released by the Diocese of Scranton:

The University of Scranton is part of a national network of institutions offering the Ready to Run Program, which is a bi-partisan program sponsored by the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers University. The Program at the University of Scranton is being hosted by its Department of Political Science and is scheduled for January 28, 2012.


The keynote speaker for the University of Scranton Program is Marjorie Margolies, who is a former member of the United States House of Representatives. During her two years in office (1993-1995), Ms. Margolies focused on issues affecting women, from abortion to health care. She co-sponsored the Abortion Clinic Access Bill, which sought to make it a federal crime to impede access to abortion clinics; voted in support of an Abortion Counseling Bill, which would have required federal recipients of funds for family planning to provide patients with information about obtaining an abortion; and opposed the “Hyde Amendment”, which prohibited federal funding of abortions. After leaving Congress, Ms. Margolies served as executive director of the Women’s Campaign Fund, a group dedicated to increasing the number of women in office who support reproductive choices and options from all parties and at all levels of government.

Recognizing that the University of Scranton planned to host a keynote speaker who clearly supports a pro-abortion agenda, the Most Reverend Joseph C. Bambera, Bishop of Scranton, engaged in a dialogue with the University. The Bishop specifically requested that the invitation extended be withdrawn; however, his request was denied.


In response to the University of Scranton’s decision to refuse his personal request, Bishop Bambera expressed his disappointment and concern by offering the following:

“The gravity of this issue speaks to the heart and substance of who we are as Christians. Because of the incarnation of Christ, every human life has value and worth. As Christians, we must be committed to defending human life at every age and every stage from conception to natural death.”

“Although a forum such as this, designed to support and encourage women to engage in public service, is by its nature good and noble, for a Catholic institution in the Diocese of Scranton to invite a pro-abortion advocate to speak at a University sponsored event is dismaying and personally disheartening to me. And to do so within days of the annual March for Life in Washington, D.C., is particularly demoralizing.”

The University’s unwillingness to work with Bishop Bambera in an effort to reach an acceptable resolution to this unfortunate situation is an unsettling turn in the relationship that the Bishop has been pleased to maintain with University officials during his tenure as Bishop of Scranton. In Ex Corde Ecclesiae, the apostolic constitution issued by Blessed Pope John Paul II regarding Catholic colleges and universities, it is noted that: “Bishops have a particular responsibility to promote Catholic Universities, and especially to promote and assist in the preservation and strengthening of their Catholic identity. A Catholic University, as Catholic, informs and carries out its research, teaching and all other activities with Catholic ideals, principles and attitudes.” In attempting to achieve a resolution, University officials noted that their invitation to Ms. Margolies was not an endorsement of her personal views. Despite the University’s lack of endorsement of the personal views of the keynote speaker, as a Jesuit and Catholic university, the inclusion of Ms. Margolies in a University sponsored program has created concern and confusion among members of the Christian faithful. Thereby, in this instance, the University’s charge as a Catholic institution of higher learning to permeate “all university activities” with “Catholic teaching and discipline” has been compromised.

To this point, Bishop Bambera commented further, “The University of Scranton has left me with no other choice but to publically express my disapproval of the invitation of this speaker and my concern regarding the University’s evolving relationship with me as Bishop of the Diocese of Scranton. Despite this unfortunate situation, I continue to be open to working with University officials to promote, preserve and strengthen the Catholic character of the University of Scranton.”

Now, some will wonder why he simply didn't tell them they could no longer be considered Catholic.  Well, this is the first step, and quite frankly, as dynamic and bold as Martino was, he didn't take it much further.  Who knows what would have happened had he continued at the helm.  Who knows what will happen in the future under Bishop Bambera if the University of Scranton persists in repeating this pattern. 

It's a start. Would that every bishop did the same in his diocese and get himself plastered on the front page of the local paper and on the internet so parents can see what these places are peddling for "catholic education". 

I know one thing, the Church - through her bishops - needs to start taking a very close look at the teachings of certain professors.  Perhaps, rather than stripping a university of it's Catholic identity (which they have already done on their own through their actions), they should start declaring these professors unfit to teach at any Catholic institution.  It's not like they can't find documentation to support their effort.  They have to want to protect young Catholics going to these institutions from the stealthy indoctrination into dissent and moral relativism that has been going on unchecked for decades. 

Let's face it:  If the university loses it's Catholic status, they will go even deeper into spreading error and the average person will not be scanning the diocesan pages to see if it is still "Catholic".  But if the professors and employees who are peddling dissidency and immorality in their "catholic brand'  are rooted out, it may do a lot more good. 

This ain't Burger King where you get to have your way; it's the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church!

Brick-by-brick

---

For interesting news items I don't have time to blog on, check out my Twitter Feed: @TeDeumBlog

Te Deum Laudamus! Home

The obedient are not held captive by Holy Mother Church; it is the disobedient who are held captive by the world!

Note: The recommended links below are automatically generated by the tool, so they are not necessarily related content.

Bishop Olmsted strips St. Joseph's of Catholic Status

Click to read the actual decree by Bishop Olmsted.  Below is his statement which goes with this decree.

I have a lot in this post, from video of Bishop Olmsted in press conference to some questions I have about St. Joseph's claim that pulmonary hypertension was causing the mother to die at just 11 weeks of pregnancy.  Something is very strange about that and I raise some questions at the bottom of my post, but not before showing that pulmonary hypertension in pregnancy is being treated with increasing success - saving mother and baby.  Any hospital worth it's salt would be interested to know what is working for others and to call them in for consultation, rather than rely on outdated text books.

Here is a video which was just released. The bishop reads the statement for which I have full text below. There is also about a 15 minute Q & A.

News Conference at the Diocesan Pastoral Center, Dec. 21, 2010 from Diocese of Phoenix on Vimeo.

Here is the letter by Bishop Olmsted that accompanies the decree shown above. 

Full Text of Bishop Olmsted's Statement (text shown in brackets was in the video and not in the text released earlier today):

St. Joseph’s Hospital no longer Catholic

Statement of Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted
December 21, 2010

Jesus says (Cf. Mt 25:40), “Whatever you did for the least of my brothers and sisters, you did for me.”

Caring for the sick is an essential part of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Throughout our history, the Church has provided great care and love to those in need. With the advent of Catholic hospitals, the faithful could also be confident that they were able to receive quality health care according to the teachings of the Church.


Authentic Catholic care in the institutions of Catholic Healthcare West(CHW) in the Diocese of Phoenix has been a topic of discussion between CHW and me from the time of our initial meeting nearly seven years ago.


At that first meeting, I learned that CHW already did not comply with the ethical teachings of the Church at Chandler Regional Hospital. The moral guide for Hospitals and Healthcare Institutions is spelled out in what are called the Ethical and Religious Directives of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. I objected strongly to CHW’s lack of compliance with these directives, and told CHW leaders that this constituted cooperation in evil that must be corrected; because if a healthcare entity wishes to call itself Catholic (as in “Catholic” Healthcare West), it needs to adhere to the teachings of the Church in all of its institutions. In all my seven years as Bishop of Phoenix, I have continued to insist that this scandalous situation needed to change; sadly, over the course of these years, CHW has chosen not to comply.


Then, earlier this year, it was brought to my attention that an abortion had taken place at St. Joseph’s


Hospital in Phoenix. When I met with officials of the hospital to learn more of the details of what had occurred, it became clear that, in the decision to abort, the equal dignity of mother and her baby were not both upheld; but that the baby was directly killed, which is a clear violation of ERD #45. It also was clear that the exceptional cases, mentioned in ERD #47, were not met, that is, that there was not a cancerous uterus or other grave malady that might justify an indirect and unintended termination of the life of the baby to treat the grave illness. In this case, the baby was healthy and there were no problems with the pregnancy; rather, the mother had a disease that needed to be treated. But instead of treating the disease, St. Joseph’s medical staff and ethics committee decided that the healthy, 11-week-old baby should be directly killed. This is contrary to the teaching of the Church (Cf. Evangelium Vitae, #62).


It was thus my duty to declare to the person responsible for this tragic decision that allowed an abortion at St. Joseph’s, Sister Margaret McBride, R.S.M., that she had incurred an excommunication by her formal consent to the direct taking of the life of this baby. I did this in a confidential manner, hoping to spare her public embarrassment. [That it became public was not my doing, or anyone who works for me]


Unfortunately, subsequent communications with leadership at St. Joseph’s Hospital and CHW have only eroded my confidence about their commitment to the Church’s Ethical and Religious Directives for Healthcare. They have not addressed in an adequate manner the scandal caused by the abortion. Moreover, I have recently learned that many other violations of the ERDs have been taking place at CHW facilities in Arizona throughout my seven years as Bishop of Phoenix and far longer.


Let me explain.


CHW and St. Joseph’s Hospital, as part of what is called “Mercy Care Plan”, have been formally cooperating with a number of medical procedures that are contrary to the ERDs, for many years. I was never made aware of this fact until the last few weeks. Here are some of the things which CHW has been formally responsible for throughout these years:


• Contraceptive counseling, medications, supplies and associated medical and laboratory examinations, including, but not limited to, oral and injectable contraceptives, intrauterine devices, diaphragms, condoms, foams and suppositories;


• Voluntary sterilization (male and female); and


• Abortions due to the mental or physical health of the mother or when the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest. This information was given to me in a meeting which included an administrator of St. Joseph’s Hospital who admitted that St. Joseph’s and CHW are aware that this plan consists in formal cooperation in evil actions which are contrary to Church teaching.

The Mercy Care Plan has been in existence for 26 years, includes some 368,000 members, and its 2010 revenues will reach nearly $2 billion. CHW and St. Joseph’s Hospital have made more than a hundred million dollars every year from this partnership with the government.


In light of all these failures to comply with the Ethical and Religious Directives of the Church, it is my duty to decree that, in the Diocese of Phoenix, at St. Joseph’s Hospital, CHW is not committed to following the teaching of the Catholic Church and therefore this hospital cannot be considered Catholic.


The Catholic faithful are free to seek care or to offer care at St. Joseph’s Hospital but I cannot guarantee that the care provided will be in full accord with the teachings of the Church. In addition, other measures will be taken to avoid the impression that the hospital is authentically Catholic, such as the prohibition of celebrating Mass at the hospital and the prohibition of reserving the Blessed Sacrament in the Chapel.


For seven years now, I have tried to work with CHW and St. Joseph’s, and I have hoped and prayed that this day would not come, that this decree would not be needed; however, the faithful of the Diocese have a right to know whether institutions of this importance are indeed Catholic in identity and practice.


For more information, please contact Rob DeFrancesco, Director of Communications • (602) 354-2130 • rdefrancesco@diocesephoenix.org

Statement of St. Josephs (source)

“Though we are deeply disappointed, we will be steadfast in fulfilling our mission,” said Linda Hunt, President of St. Joseph’s. “St. Joseph’s hospital will remain faithful to our mission of care, as we have for the last 115 years. Our caregivers deliver extraordinary medical care and share an unmatched commitment to the wellbeing of the communities they serve. Nothing has or will change in that regard.”


Hunt emphasized that the hospital will not change its name or its mission, which were both established by the Sisters of Mercy in 1895. “St. Joseph’s will continue through our words and deeds to carry out the healing ministry of Jesus,” Hunt said. “Our operations, policies, and procedures will not change.”


The announcement by Bishop Olmsted follows months of complex talks between the Phoenix Diocese, the hospital, and the hospital’s parent company, Catholic Healthcare West. At issue is the life-saving care delivered to a pregnant patient in November 2009 at St. Joseph’s. In that case, a decision was made to terminate an 11-week pregnancy in order to save the mother’s life.


“Consistent with our values of dignity and justice, if we are presented with a situation in which a pregnancy threatens a woman’s life, our first priority is to save both patients. If that is not possible we will always save the life we can save, and that is what we did in this case,” said Hunt. “We continue to stand by the decision, which was made in collaboration with the patient, her family, her caregivers, and our Ethics Committee. Morally, ethically, and legally we simply cannot stand by and let someone die whose life we might be able to save.”

As an aside, there is no way for a doctor to say with certainty that the patient would have died.   Doctors use statistical and other data as guidelines, but in the end that is all they are - guidelines.  Here is a sampling of various kinds of cases where women were given no hope, but they and/or their babies survived:

• Doctors wanted us to abort our son (Washington Examiner)
• Baby survives "incurable" illness (LifeSiteNews)
• Doctor beats the odds with 100% success rate on saving mothers and babies with Pulmonary Hypertension (WISN - Milwaukee).  Here is a powerpoint made later by Dr. Dianne Zwicke and colleagues on how 45 of 45 consecutive cases of mothers with the condition alleged to be at the center of the Phoenix case were treated successfully. It goes into details for medical workers.

Here is a doctor talking about the notion of killing a healthy baby to "save the life of the mother".  He's not buying it and it goes along similar lines as Dr. Zwicke in that last story.  It was contained in this LifeSiteNews story back when it was announced that Sister McBride had excommunicated herself.  Here is a clip. My comments are bracketed in red; emphases mine in bold.

Dr. Paul A. Byrne, Director of Neonatology and Pediatrics at St. Charles Mercy Hospital in Toledo, Ohio, disputes the claim that an abortion is ever a procedure necessary to save the life of the mother, or carries less risk than birth.


In an interview with LifeSiteNews, Dr. Byrne said, “I don’t know of any [situation where abortion is necessary to save the life of the mother].


“I know that a lot of people talk about these things, but I don’t know of any. The principle always is preserve and protect the life of the mother and the baby.”


Byrne has the distinction of being a pioneer in the field of neonatology, beginning his work in the field in 1963 and becoming a board-certified neonatologist in 1975. He invented one of the first oxygen masks for babies, an incubator monitor, and a blood-pressure tester for premature babies, which he and a colleague adapted from the finger blood pressure checkers used for astronauts. [Looks pretty qualified to me to have an opinion on the subject of pulmonary hypertension in pregnant women]


Byrne emphasized that he was not commentating on what the woman’s particular treatment should have been under the circumstances, given that she is not his patient. [He was referring to the case at St. Joseph's in Phoenix]


“But given just pulmonary hypertension, the answer is no” to abortion, said Byrne.


Byrne emphasized that the unborn child at 11 weeks gestation would have a negligible impact on the woman’s cardiovascular system. He said that pregnancy in the first and second trimesters would not expose a woman with even severe pulmonary hypertension – which puts stress on the heart and the lungs – to any serious danger. [What he says is pretty consistent with this emedicine article on Pregnancy and Hypertension.]


A pregnant mother’s cardiovascular system does have “major increases,” but they only happen “in the last three months of pregnancy,” [!] Byrne explained.


The point of fetal viability is estimated at anywhere between 21 - 24 weeks, at which point he speculated the baby could have been artificially be delivered and had a good shot at surviving. In the meantime the mother’s pulmonary hypertension could be treated, even by such simple things as eliminating salt from her diet, exercising, or losing weight.


“It’s not going to be any extra stress on the mother that she can’t stand,” said Byrne. “Eventually you get to where the baby gets big enough that the baby can live outside the uterus and you don’t have to do an abortion.”


“I am only aware of good things happening by doing that. I am not aware of anything bad happening to the mother because the baby was allowed to live.”


“The only reason to kill the baby at 11 weeks is because it is smaller,” [!] which makes the abortion easier to perform, he said, not because the mother’s life is in immediate danger.  [This goes to what I said about the questionable nature of the hospital's claim that it had to kill a baby, 11 weeks into gestation to save the life of mother]


“I’ve done this work just about as long as neonatology has existed,” said Byrne. “The key is we must protect and preserve life, and we have to do that from conception to the natural end.” [Right on!]

"Saving the Life of the Mother" or Saving Money?

Let's look at an angle on this case not being discussed in the secular media...

As long as a hospital has convinced itself that treating pulmonary hypertension in pregnant women is a win-lose situation ("save" the mother; kill the baby), it absolves itself of exploring win-win solutions (mother and baby survive) that have proven hopeful or even downright successful.  Mortality rate is high using conventional treatment methods on true pulmonary hypertension in pregnancy (that is, in 2nd/3rd trimester - the Phoenix case involved a 1st trimester case).  Further, if you read how Dr. Zwicke treats such patients you will learn that fatality often happens in the days following delivery.  She puts mothers through aggressive fluid reduction treatment as soon as the baby is delivered to mitigate this risk.

If one doctor saved 45 out of 45 consecutive cancer patients who had a 60% chance of dying, there would be people flying in from all around the world to see what she was doing right.  But we aren't talking about cancer.  We are talking about pregnancy in a culture increasingly using murder as a legitimate option to solve expensive problems and matters of inconvenience.  St. Joseph's would do well to serve it's patients by asking Dr. Dianne Zwicke to come in for a consultation so that they don't have to resort to outdated and barbaric methods to deal with what is an increasingly treatable condition. 

There is one other set of questions we ought to ponder.  What is the cost of putting up a mother in the hospital for as long as it takes to get her stable by medications, salt reduction, weight loss, and/or the baby to viability?  It costs only a few hundred dollars to perform an abortion and everyone moves on.  That is far lower than the cost of just putting someone in a hospital room for a week and giving them three squares a day, setting aside medical care.  This says nothing of the cost a hospital or insurance company can have if the baby is delivered prematurely and needs intensive care for several weeks.  I'm not saying this is the case in Phoenix, however, it raises more questions:

Were such financial issues in the decision-making process in the Phoenix case?   Once again, I raise the question because something doesn't add up to say that at 11 weeks (1st Trimester), this baby threatened the life of the mother.  I can't seem to find anything in the medical literature I've gone over that would even suggest that pregnancy can cause life threatening pulmonary hypertension in the first trimester. 

Let us pray for the mother, the bishop and those at the hospital involved with this case. 

FURTHER REFERENCES and LINKS (may be updated)

• Diocese of Phoenix has set up a page for this case which will be updated
• Ed Peters, JD, JCD: Bp. Olmsted, Canon 216, and St. Joseph's Hospital
• Jimmy Akin's post
• St. Joseph’s in Phoenix: a note about their “follow” list on Twitter (Father Z)
• Tom Peters at Catholic Vote

Back in February, Bishop Vasa in Oregon yanked Catholic status from a hospital that was performing voluntary sterlizations.

---

For interesting news items I don't have time to blog on, check out my Twitter Feed: @TeDeumBlog

Te Deum Laudamus! Home

The obedient are not held captive by Holy Mother Church; it is the disobedient who are held captive by the world!

Note: The recommended links below are automatically generated by the tool, so they are not necessarily related content.

Phoenix - Will Catholic Healthcare West get to keep "Catholic"?

From Catholic Culture:

On December 17, Bishop Thomas Olmsted of Phoenix will declare that St. Joseph’s Hospital is no longer a Catholic institution unless its parent company recognizes that the abortion that took place there violated the US bishops’ ethical directives and pledges it “will never occur again.”


The bishop’s November 22 letter to Lloyd H. Dean, president of Catholic Healthcare West (CHW), followed earlier correspondence in which Catholic Healthcare West, relying on the analysis of M. Therese Lysaught, attempted to justify the killing of the unborn child that took place at the hospital in late 2009. Lysaught is associate professor of theology and director of graduate studies at Marquette University.


In response, Bishop Olmsted wrote that as bishop, it was his task to interpret the moral law and the bishops’ ethical norms authoritatively within the diocese.

Continue reading, Bishop rips hospital chain, threatens to revoke Catholic status of hospital, at Catholic Culture.  You will want to follow that link which has a copy of the faxed letter.

The Diocese of Phoenix has released a statement today - just one paragraph:

Statement of the Diocese of Phoenix



Re: The Diocese of Phoenix and St. Joseph’s Hospital

(Dec. 15, 2010) — The letter to Mr. Lloyd Dean that was made public today is considered to be private and confidential. The bishop and his staff are working together with Catholic Healthcare West and St. Joseph’s Hospital to find the best way to provide authentic Catholic health care in accordance with the Church’s teaching.

Copy of Faxed Letter
I'm not quite sure who leaked the letter, but it has obviously been leaked by someone in the office on the receiving end (I've observed a number of occasions where dissenting parties will run to the press with such things.  I don't know if that is the case here, but how did the secular press in Arizona get the copy stamped "Fax Received" and why was it shared?   Click here for that letter.

Others blogging on this (may get updated; watch the comboxes)

• Bishop Threatens Smackdown on Catholic Abortion Hospital  (Jimmy Akin)
• Update: CHW responds to our social campaign in support of +Olmsted (Tom Peters)
  
  

  ---

For interesting news items I don't have time to blog on, check out my Twitter Feed: @TeDeumBlog

Te Deum Laudamus! Home

The obedient are not held captive by Holy Mother Church; it is the disobedient who are held captive by the world!

Note: The recommended links below are automatically generated by the tool, so they are not necessarily related content.

Video: Archbishop Dolan calling out the NY Times

I blogged on this the other day, linking to a post made by Archbishop Timothy Dolan of New York at his blog. 

Now, there is a video story by a local news network, which includes an interview with +Dolan.  I'm glad he spoke out and I think all of us need to keep hitting home the message that they wouldn't have done this to any other religious, ethnic or racial group in the US. 

Veil-tip to Rocco Palmo and Dcn Greg Kandra

Te Deum Laudamus! Home

The obedient are not held captive by Holy Mother Church; it is the disobedient who are held captive by the world!

Note: The recommended links below are automatically generated by the tool, so they are not necessarily related content.

Archbishop Raymond L. Burke on dissenting Catholics; role of bishops in curbing

You will want to read the entire article.  Here is just a nibble of what Archbishop Raymond L. Burke had to say in his address at  Human Life International gathering...

The American prefect of the Apostolic Signatura began by pointing out that society is experiencing "a period of intense and critical struggle" in advancing a culture of life, made worse by temptations to relativize the authority of the magisterium.

"Man is tempted to view the magisterium in relation to his individualism and self-pursuit," he told the large gathering of representatives belonging to the pro-life movement. Referring to the popularly known phrase "cafeteria Catholicism," he called first and foremost on bishops to uphold the natural moral law, reminding them of Benedict XVI's exhortation to bishops "to be aware of the challenges of the present hour and have the courage to face them."

Noting that the bishop, as chief teacher of faith and morals in the diocese, carries an especially "heavy and constant burden" in providing sound teaching that safeguards all life, he stressed that obedience to the magisterium is a virtue, one obtained "through the practice" of such obedience.

"When shepherds of the flock are obedient to the magisterium entrusted to their exercise, then surely the numbers of the flock grow in obedience," he said. "If the shepherd isn't obedient, the flock easily gives way to confusion and error." Quoting the Prophet Zechariah, he said the shepherd can be "especially tempted" by the assaults of Satan who, "if he can strike him, the work of scattering the flock is made easy."

"Faith is first of all personal adherence of man to God," underlined Archbishop Burke, and recalled the words of a wise professor of canon law he knew who would often tell his classes: "Where there are problems of chastity, there are problems of obedience." Rebellion against the moral truth, Archbishop Burke noted, "is a rebellion against God and all that he teaches us."

Go Read: A Plea for Life, Truth, and Obedience at Zenit

UPDATE:  Here is a full length video and text at Human Life International

Pray for dissenting and confused Catholics.  Please pray for priests and especially for our bishops. May God bless them with wisdom and holy boldness to rid the Church of the dissent and ambiguity which has confused generations of Catholics

Te Deum Laudamus! Home

The obedient are not held captive by Holy Mother Church; it is the disobedient who are held captive by the world!

Note: The recommended links below are automatically generated by the tool, so they are not necessarily related content.