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salt would be interested to know what is working for others and to call them in for consultation, rather than rely on outdated text books.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.

UK's Bishop Patrick O'Donoghue: Disobedience is harming the Church

Note: Post corrected. I had mistakenly wrote the bishop was from Ireland. Thanks for the corrections sent to me!

From Anna Arco of the UK Catholic Herald (emphases in bold are mine; comments bracketed in red):

Bishops who have deep theological differences with the Pope are undermining the unity of the Catholic Church, a prominent English bishop has claimed.

Bishop Patrick O'Donoghue [recently retired bishop of Lancaster] said that such differences prompted parish priests to ignore the authority of their bishops. [It takes some real chutzpah for a bishop in disobedience to the Pope to then cry foul over priests and laity who "disobey" them.]

He said: "The idea that there could be theological differences between a bishop and the Pope is just an incredible thing to admit but it is the truth [contraception, and liberation theology are two areas that come to mind, not to mention distortions about what is ok and not ok for Catholics with regards to politics and voting]. I suppose if priests see bishops showing disloyalty to the Pope, it is hardly surprising that they in turn should show disloyalty to their bishop. We all know what Jesus said about a divided house." [Exactly, and where does it end?]

He added: "It is not uncommon for cliques to grow up among priests against the current bishop that ignore with disdain directives and advice from their bishop. Sometimes it seems that the parish priest and parish declare UDI (Unilateral Declaration of Independence) from the bishop and the diocese. There is also a danger of this developing in a group of bishops' attitude to the reigning Pope." [and in some countries, that may include an entire bishop's conference, or the majority of it's members which is really scandalous].

The bishop said this disunity created a "conspiracy of silence" in the Church.

He said: "This cocktail of dissent, disobedience and disloyalty [great description] has resulted in what I call 'a conspiracy of silence' amongst groups in the Church. There is no real dialogue or willingness to talk openly and honestly about our differences.

"For example, I don't know why my Fit for Mission? documents hit a wall of silence among the bishops in this country. All I did was reiterate the teaching of the Church, but this has been treated as unacceptable and unspeakable. Why?"

Bishop O'Donoghue offered his analysis at a retreat for priests of the Diocese of Northampton in Ars, the parish of St John Vianney in France in May. He called attention to the fact that "countless individual priests, and laity, even bishops, believe they are free to decide what it means to be Catholic for themselves" [this is what I refer to as the desire to build a "designer religion" out of Catholicism. That is, each individual designing Catholicism to be what he or she wants it to be]. He suggested that accepting the Church's teaching on sexual morality was a "litmus test" for Catholics. [Let's face it, people aren't debating the Trinity]

"For example, we have witnessed a wholesale rejection of the Church's perennial teaching against contraception. This is the litmus test of the acceptance of the obedience in the Church. How many priests support Gaudium et Spes's crystal-clear rejection of contraception, upheld by successive popes - Paul VI, John Paul II, Benedict XVI? [Gaudium et Spes is one of many documents of Vatican II. How often have you heard the expression "spirit of the Vatican II" used to pervert the truth of what the council actually taught? I just had another person I know, who teaches CCD in her parish, tell me that Vatican II did away with purgatory! I suggested very charitably that she read the documents of Vatican II in their entirety and that not only did it not do away with purgatory, it never got rid of confession and the punishment due to sin, especially grave sin.] If we reject their teaching on this matter we are saying as priests that we know better than the successor of Peter! Is this tenable in a priest?" [He says it like it is, in very plain language. Christ did not intend for people to have a PhD in order to discern whether or not they should obey the Pope. They did not receive the keys, Peter and his successors did. Rather, Christ reminded us to be like children. Accept the message in simplicity. The minute someone starts to muddy the waters with complexity, just run the other way]

Bishop O'Donoghue not only criticised liberal dissent but also had sharp words for traditionalists who he said were in danger of falling into "liturgism".

He said: "By this I mean the tendency among clergy and some laity to solely focus on the liturgy and sacramental life, ignoring our mission to go out of the church building into the world where suffering humanity lives. For a century the Church has been saying that social justice should be a concern of Catholics equal to attending Mass on Sunday. How many believe this? How many priests encourage this?" [there is some truth to this, but I also know from experience that some do not count pro-life work as a "justice" issue. Further, I know many people in traditional communities whose charity truly starts at home, with those closest to them. They may not be working at a homeless shelter, but even Mother Teresa said that we need to work with the poor among us. Still others work in ministries for years without anyone knowing about it. There are those who do prison ministry and who work in crisis pregnancy centers, for example. Would you know it by visiting the parish? Not necessarily because it's not advertised in the bulletin and is not a community effort. I think many do get involved in "works", but I believe it is more individualized apostolate work. And, I'll add that for many people I know, that apostolate work is rooted first in a deep prayer life that often includes daily Mass, adoration, and frequent confession (in other words they sanctify themselves and this brings graces to their work). But, going back to Bishop O'Donoghue's point, we must always examine our conscience that we are living our faith, not just taking from it what we like in the beautiful liturgies]

Bishop O'Donoghue also discussed the life of St John Vianney, whose 150th anniversary is being celebrated this year and who is the patron of the Year for Priests, drawing parallels between the challenges faced by the saintly parish priest and the priests today.

He argued that St John Vianney had a "keen sense of the need for salvation" which he expressed in his "whole being as a priest" [It's not just a job....it's a way of life]. Bishop O'Donoghue urged the priests who were taking part to reflect on a number of questions about their roles and identity as priests in the modern world. This included questions about attitudes to consumerism, alcohol, confronting evil and true repentance.

He also asked them: "Is it possible to talk to young people about salvation today? And is it necessary to go to confession regularly? What do you think the Curé d'Ars would say?" Fr Paul Hardy, a priest who took part in the retreat, said: "He was very good. He talked about the challenges facing us - do we duck them or do we face up to them."

I can't say enough about the Holy Father's choice of St. John Vianney. The job of a priest is not to comfort people and make them happy, but to teach people to cooperate with God's graces and His will for each of us. Ultimately, it's about saving souls, not saving self-esteem.

Source article - Bishop: Disobedience is harming the Church

Related articles:

• Bishop: English Church has lost it's way (UK Catholic Herald)
• Educated Catholics have sown dissent and confusion in the Church, claims bishop (UK Telegraph).
• Change and Continuity (Interview with Bishop O'Donoghue at Zenit in 2008)
  

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!

Swiss Bishop corrects errors advanced in the name of Vatican II

Call it disinformation, misinformation, trash-talk, or anything else you want. Regardless of the label, the bottom line is that much error about Vatican II has been spread by parties who do not have the mind of the Church, but want the Church to mind their wishful thinking. The Church, through her bishops, has been working to dispel some common myths through efforts like the one below.

Fr. Z has a translation of an article in a July 2009 newsletter to priests by Bishop Kurt Koch of the Diocese of Basel, Switzerland. The Bishop reacts to some of the negativity lobbed at Pope Benedict XVI by some in the media, and in the Church about Vatican II related issues.

As an aside, I am not sure who did the translation, or how accurate it is. If you are interested in the original German, click here to go directly to the Diocese of Basel webpage.

Bishop Koch writes:

What moves me?

More honesty please!

In the last few weeks a lot of journalists, and also some clergy, have been expressing their opinions of Pope Benedict. In these opinions were also contained many half-truths, untruths, and slanders.The worst accusation asserts that the Pope wishes to go back to before the Second Vatican Council. This accusation is the worst because it implies that the very person who possesses the teaching authority of the universal Church would work to undermine the authority of the council. This verdict, however, would be completely mistaken. As a young theologian, in fact, Benedict XVI contributed very much to the council. Anyone who seeks to understand the Pope now—not just from the media—but also by reading what he writes, would come to the conclusion that he has oriented his entire magisterium on the council. How should we then understand the accusation being made?

Many people have signed a petition for the unqualified acceptance of the council. Right from the start, the expression "unqualified acceptance" irritates me because I don’t know anyone—myself included—to whom it would apply. A few arbitrarily chosen examples will suffice:

– The council did not abolish Latin in the liturgy. On the contrary, it emphasized that in the Roman Rite, apart from exceptional cases, the use of the Latin language must be maintained. Who among the vocal defenders of the council wishes "unqualified acceptance" of that? [Right. Hey, you liberals out there! Wanna sign on to that?]

– The council declared that the Church regards Gregorian Chant as the "music proper to the Roman Rite", and that it must therefore "be given primary place." In how many parishes is this implemented "without qualification?"

– The council expressly requested that governmental authorities voluntarily give up those rights to participation in the selection of bishops, that had arisen over the course of time. Which defender of the council advocates "without qualification" for that?

– The council described the fundamental nature of the liturgy as the celebration the pascal mystery and the eucharistic sacrifice as "the completion of the work of our salvation." How can that be reconciled with my experience, made in many different parishes, that the sacrificial understanding of the Mass has been completely eliminated from the liturgical language and the Mass is now understood only as a meal or "the breaking of bread?" In what way can one justify this profound change by reference to the council?

– No office of the Church was given more significance by the council that that of bishop. How can we then understand the widespread diminishment in Switzerland of this office of the Church, which is justified by reference to the council? When, for example, Hans Kung denies completely the teaching authority of the bishops, allowing them only the office of pastoral leadership?

It would not be difficult to lengthen this litany. Even so, it should be obvious why I demand more honesty in the current debate about the council. Instead of accusing others, and even the Pope, of wishing to go back to before the council, everyone would be well advised to look over their own books and reassess their own personal position on the council. Because not everything that was said and done after the council, was therefore done in accordance with the council—and that applies also to the diocese of Basel. In any case, the last few weeks have illustrated to me that a primary problem in the current situation has been a very poor, and in part very one-sided understanding and acceptance of the council, even by Catholics that defend the council "without qualification." In this regard we all—once more including myself—have a lot of ground to make up. Therefore I again repeat my urgent request: More honesty please!

+ Kurt Koch
Bishop of Basel

Please pray for our bishops! May they be graced with the kind of wisdom and courage that guided the first bishops who died in their efforts to prevent error from spreading and misleading the faithful.

Related Links:

• A Swiss bishop sounds off about Vatican II (Fr. Z - well worth reading for the inline comments and for the combox chatter on the topic).

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!

Scranton Shepherd, Bishop Martino, calls for dissolution of Misericordia's "Diversity Institute"

Oh boy! The Times-Leader in Pennsylvania had to round up a bunch of students since they weren't consulted by Bishop Martino. Surprise! They disagree with him.


That Catholics would essentially thumb their noses at the local bishop when he clarifies Catholic teaching on faith and morals is manifest need for a more remedial kind of remedy. Perhaps Misericordia could make this the text for a required class for students and faculty, based on the same name. They might want to pay particular attention to Part 1, Chapter 1 (What it means to be Catholic) and chapter 2 (Who's who in the Catholic Church). The section on bishops and archbishops is on page 36.

---

Original Post

File Photo from the Scranton Times-Tribune

Rock on God bless you, Bishop Martino!

One thing is for certain. His Excellency is persistant and is ensuring that scandal is not happening in his diocese without a clear understanding of the Church's position. Keep in mind, there is only so much a bishop can do with Catholic institutes of higher education when they stray.

I've been making posts weekly about the actions of Bishop Martino in Scranton, PA. This is the same bishop who stood up at the USCCB's November meeting and told his brother bishops that they would one day have to account for their "collective reticence to speak to Catholic politicians who are not just reluctant, but stridently anti-life." .

Bishop Martino takes the matter of scandal very seriously. There is nothing going on at Misericordia University that is not going on at countless other institutions which are proving to be Catholic in name only. Some bishops have chosen to try to change the situation at local colleges through discrete dialogue, I'm sure with the best of intentions. However, it is a very public thing when a Catholic institution invites speakers who will very likley promote things, in the name of diversity, that are in complete conflict with basic Catholic teaching.

Bishop Martino has spoken and acted with a candor, publicly, in ways that have had pro-lifers breathing a sigh of relief and dissident Catholics rolling their eyes (see some of my earlier posts at the bottom).

In the past week, His Excellency has been firing away at Misericordia University for bringing to the school to speak, author Keith Boykin, who is the former president of a same-sex marriage advocacy group. The schools "Diversity Institute" co-sponsored the visit. Boykin was also brought to the school before, as a visiting scholar, for a week.

Now, Bishop Martino is calling on the school to dissovle it's Diversity Institute. A February 24, 2009 press release states (emphases mine, comments bracketed in red):

Bishop Asks Misericordia To Specify How Sexuality Is Taught

In response to Misericordia University’s assertion that it “is committed deeply to its Catholic mission,” Bishop Joseph F. Martino observes that the institution should convey to its alumni, and in fact to all the faithful of the Diocese of Scranton, its efforts to teach Catholic morality regarding sexuality and homosexuality.

In doing this, the Bishop believes the school should speak precisely, naming courses, content and even catalog numbers. [Good, lest more ambiguous fluff be passed off as objective, Catholic content]

Bishop Martino’s position at this time follows his “absolute disapproval” of the university’s hosting of Keith Boykin, a proponent of morality that is disturbingly opposed to Catholic teaching.

Mr. Boykin made two presentations at the school on Feb. 17. In at least one of his talks, he discussed advocacy for issues such as same sex marriage, and he addressed the intersection of religion and sexuality. The Catholic Church’s teaching on homosexuality was not presented at the event. [If any teen, university student, faculty member, or other adult does not comprehend just how basic this is - as in 101, here is a remedy]

A statement from the Diocese issued the day before the talks noted that “Mr. Boykin has authored three books and all three have been nominated for a Lambda Literary award. Lambda is a legal advocacy effort for homosexual causes. Mr. Boykin is an avid supporter of same sex marriage and is an activist for positions disturbingly opposed to Catholic moral teaching.

“Bishop Martino wants Catholics of the Diocese of Scranton to know of his absolute disapproval of Misericordia University’s hosting Mr. Boykin. By honoring this speaker through allowing his positions, so antithetical to Catholic Church teaching, to be broadcast on its campus, the University has rejected all four essential characteristics of a Catholic institution of higher learning. These are: [1]its Christian inspiration, [2]its obligation to reflect on knowledge in light of the Catholic faith, [3]its fidelity to Catholic Church teaching and [4] its commitment to serve the people of God.

“The faithful of the Diocese of Scranton, the Bishop observed, should be in no doubt that Misericordia University in this instance is seriously failing in maintaining its Catholic identity.”

Misericordia responded with a statement saying it understood the Bishop’s criticism, but “Mr. Boykin’s appearance . . . is not meant to be a forum for advocacy on any singular issue.” The statement also said the University “welcomes legitimate scholarly discussion among its students, faculty, staff and guests from diverse religious and cultural backgrounds.”

The statement also said that “Misericordia University is committed deeply to its Catholic mission.” [Do they understand the Catholic mission?!?!?]

Regarding the request for specific information from Misericordia, Bishop Martino said that students attending a Catholic institution should have a clear understanding that while all persons should be treated with dignity, homosexual activity is not condoned by the Church and should never be construed as acceptable behavior. [This is always a red-herring that Catholic dissidents try to paint this as discriminatory or uncharitable. They confuse the two issues. The Church does not hate people with SSA. She does not try to "enforce" laws made up out of thin air. Nor are these laws made up by the Pope in such a way as to change with wind direction. The Ten Commandments are clear about fornication and adultery. Christ came to fulfil the law, not abolish it so the Ten Commandments are not the 10 Suggestions. Whether one is of homosexual or heterosexual orientation, all who are not bound in sacramental marriage must observe chastity. Furthermore, Vatican II did not do away with the Old Testament, or the New Testament, or the council of Trent for that matter].

Bishop Martino is also asking Misericordia to seriously consider discontinuing its Diversity Institute, which co-sponsored Mr. Boykin’s appearance. He had previously served for a week as a visiting scholar with the Institute.

The Bishop’s rationale is that students should learn respect for all races and cultures, but that viewpoints that are in direct opposition to Catholic teaching should not be presented under the guise of “diversity.” [You gotta love this bishop]. Doing so within a formal structure sanctioned by the institution gives the impression that these viewpoints are acceptable, or that all morality is relative. [and, creates grave scandal among those so poorly catechized they don't even know what it all means].

Keep an eye on this press release page at the Diocese of Scranton.

Hat tip to LifeSiteNews: Bishop Martino Calls for Dissolution of Misericordia U's Homosexualist "Diversity" Institute

Previous posts on Bishop Martino:

• Video: Newsclip about Bishop Martino and the St. Patrick's Day Parade


• Bishop Martino threatens to close Scranton's Cathedral on St. Patrick's Day...


• Why did Bishop Martino Voice Disapproval of Talk by Keith Boykin?


• Despite Bishop Martino's Protest, Gay-Right's Speech Takes Place at Misericordia


• It's Bishop Martino....again, this time taking on Misericordia University for inviting gay-rights advocate


• Bishop Martino to Sen. Robert Casey on Formally Cooperating with Evil


• Bishop of Scranton Martino refuses communion for politicians who campaign in favor of abortion rights


• Bishop Martino of Scranton, PA: "This is madness, people!"


• Bishop Martino on the "collective reticence" of his confreres for not being more vocal about pro-abortion Catholic politicians. (from the USCCB General Asm)
  

Oh, heck....just click the Bp Martino label

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!

It's Bishop Martino....again, this time taking on Misericordia University for inviting gay-rights advocate

Bishop Joseph Martino of Scranton does not walk on eggshells and makes Catholic teaching very clear in his diocese. This time, he is taking on Misericordia University for signing on a gay-rights advocate to talk tomorrow.

It was just about two weeks ago that Bishop Martino provided an open letter to Senator Bob Casey informing him that unless he rescinded his vote on the Martinez ammendment, he would be "formally cooperating in evil".

This is the bishop who stood up at the USCCB's annual fall conference and said that the bishops would one day have to deal with their "collective reticence" on the question of Catholic politicians who support abortion rights in defiance of church teaching.

And it's the same Bishop Martino who crashed a pre-election forum held on Catholic property in which some were skewing Church documents, notably the USCCB's Faithful Citizenship, to the advantage of pro-choice pols (and against Catholic teaching).

Emphases mine in bold, comments in red...

Update: Bishop Martino criticizes appearance of gay-rights advocate

Scranton Bishop Joseph Martino today publicly criticized a local Catholic university’s plan to host a gay-rights advocate on Tuesday.

The bishop voiced “absolute disapproval” of Misericordia University’s hosting Keith Boykin, whom Bishop Martino calls an author and “avid supporter of same-sex marriage.”

Bishop Martino calls Mr. Boykin’s beliefs “disturbingly opposed to Catholic moral teaching.”

Misericordia understands the “bishop’s criticism,” according to a statement the school released today.

But the statement also notes that Mr. Boykin’s speech is not meant to be a forum for advocacy on any single issue [it doesn't matter - it can lead people into scandal if they know what he represents, which counters Catholic moral teaching].

“Misericordia University is committed deeply to its Catholic mission. Inseparable from that mission is our identity as an academic institution where ideas and positions are explored critically and freely,” the release stated. [Hello?!?!? Is anybody home??? The two identities must be compatible, not in conflict.]

Efforts to reach Mr. Boykin have not been successful. Mr. Boykin, a New York Times best-selling author and Harvard law school classmate of President Barack Obama, will speak twice at Misericordia on Tuesday, once at 2 p.m. in the Bevevino Library and again at 8 p.m. in the Lemmond Theater at Walsh Hall.

The diocese’s statement concludes: “The faithful of the Diocese of Scranton, the Bishop observed, should be in no doubt that Misericordia University in this instance is seriously failing in maintaining its Catholic identity.”

Misericordia University, based in Dallas, Luzerne County, is a Catholic-affiliated school founded in 1924 by the Religious Sisters of Mercy.

Mr. Boykin is to be hosted by the university’s Diversity Institute, the bishop says. The institute’s goal is “working collaboratively with community members to promote multi-cultural understanding and the elimination of all forms of discrimination,” according to its Web site.

I wonder if Bishop Martino will be attending the talk for a followup.

Udpate 1: More articles on this are hitting the net

Watch for further updates

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!

Bishop Hermann: Anger at Obama is anger misdirected...

Bishop Hermann of St. Louis processes at the Installation Mass of Archbishop Allen H. Vigneron last Wednesday.

I saw this probably a week ago, and have not had time to post it. I still don't have time to post it, but I am posting it!!!

Bishop Hermann is the administrator for the Diocese of St. Louis on the interim since Bishop Raymond L. Burke was appointed to head the Apostolic Signatura. You may recall Bishop Hermann by his words at the bishop's conference when he said he would be willing to die to end abortion.

Check this out, if you haven't already seen it...

Emphases are mind in bold, with added emphases in enlarged text.

Bishop Hermann: 'I thought you should know’

By Bishop Robert J. Hermann, Archdiocesan Administrator

January 27, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - I was very edified this past Saturday to see the Cathedral almost filled for the Pro-Life Mass. Then to see such a large contingent, on a very cold day, make a pilgrimage to the abortion clinic, praying the Rosary for Life, was truly heartwarming.

At the very moment I am writing this, our new president, Barack Obama, is being sworn into office. We congratulate him, and we pray for him, but we cannot condone his pro-death policies, even while we are happy that so many people feel they have new hope. We must do everything we can to oppose his pro-death-to-children efforts.

Joseph Bottum, in an article entitled "Abortion after Obama," writing in the January 2009 edition of First Things, pages 13-15, tells us, "Now the 2008 election has brought us the presidency of Barack Obama, the most consistent supporter of legalized abortion ever nominated by a majority party."

When asked about making decisions as to when a baby gets human rights, President Obama answered that "is above my pay grade." He also stated that he would not want his daughters "punished with a baby."

He has made it known that, upon taking office, he will remove all federal restrictions on funding embryonic stem-cell research. He also intends to sign the Freedom of Choice Act. Seldom has our nation ever been confronted with such an extreme measure. The Freedom of Choice Act will invalidate for the entire country all restrictions on abortion before viability, including parental notification, waiting periods and partial-birth abortion bans. President Obama has no problem supporting legislation that would even kill a child who survived a botched abortion.

If at this stage our anger is directed at President Obama, our anger is misdirected. Obama is not the enemy. He needs and deserves our prayers, not our condemnation.

As Catholics, we are not guiltless. It seems to me that when President Kennedy compromised Catholic teachings and accommodated political pressures in order to be elected to the highest office in the land, he set the tone for many Catholic leaders to follow and to compromise their Catholic principles to get ahead.

In our Supreme Court and in our Congress, we have a plethora of so-called Catholics who are failing to live their Catholic identity. Over 50 percent of our electorate voted for a president who is one of the most pro-culture-of-death candidates from a major party to run for the highest office of the land.

Yes, we can thank one-half of our Catholics for bailing out on their faith!

After almost 50 years of having 50 percent of Catholics abandoning their Catholic identity, we cannot expect to turn this culture around by short-term political efforts.

In order to bring about a transformation from a culture of death to a culture of life, we have to restore our Catholic identity.

This means that all of us, as Catholics, have to undergo a profound transformation. It means that we have to take a good look at every facet of our Catholic life, including the serious study of life issues, the regular and devout use of our Sacramental system, especially the devout and weekly attendance at Mass, the regular reception of the Sacrament of Reconciliation, the devout praying of the daily Rosary, and then the faithful, loving and firm witness to lax Catholics about our Catholic beliefs and practices.

We have to live our lives in such a way that we will be unafraid to witness to what we believe and live.

I may courageously say that I am willing to die to end abortion, but am I equally willing to say that I am ready to let my ego get ruffled daily for the same cause? Yet … that is where I need to arrive if I am to be a credible witness.

What a glorious opportunity we all have to make a difference in the pro-life cause. Until we are willing to be politically incorrect in order to be biblically correct, we will never convince anyone that our religion is worth living.

It does not take 100 percent of our Catholics to transform this country. If 75 percent of our Catholics were steeped in Catholic identity, the abortion issue would be over for our entire country. We have many, many evangelicals on our side in the culture of life. Look at how many more of them would flock to our side if we really lived our Catholic teachings! They, too, are looking for changeless principles lived out in practice.

But there is more! Our laxity in living our Catholic life has blinded us into not seeing the role of Satan in the culture of death. Satan is having a heyday in our midst, because he has managed to remain invisible in the culture of death, and our laxity has granted him that luxury. Since we are not steeped in the Word of God as we should be, we do not recognize his darkness in our society. Our first reading from Hebrews tells us, "The word of God is living and effective, sharper than any two-edged sword, penetrating even between soul and spirit, joints and marrow, and able to discern reflections and thoughts of the heart."

St. Paul tells us that our warfare is not against flesh and blood but against the power and principles of darkness. He also tells us that we should not let the sun go down upon our anger so as to give Satan a foothold. These readings are wake-up calls for us all. I bring this up deliberately, because I do not want us to fall into Satan's trap of getting us to hate President Obama or any of the pro-choice Catholic legislators in Congress. Being pro-life means that we engage far more in spiritual warfare than in political warfare.

That Satan is very alive in influencing all of us is his best-kept secret. Becoming steeped in the Word of God and the teachings of the Catholic Church exposes his evil machinations.

President Obama, pro-choice legislators and Planned Parenthood are not our enemies. Our enemies are the invisible forces masked behind these people. Most of them do not have a clue that they are being deceived by our common enemy, the devil. They are used by our common enemy, Satan, and his evil forces, to get us to hate so that we, too, will end up in a culture of death. President Obama and all pro-choice and pro-abortion legislators, as well as members supporting Planned Parenthood (and we have in our own state a national legislator who has received over $900,000 from groups that advocate for abortion rights) — these are not our enemies. They are used by the evil one to get us to hate them in our efforts to be pro-life and thereby ditch our pro-life efforts. We cannot fall for that trap!

We owe all of them prayers and fasting for their conversion. At one point, Gov. Reagan was California's very pro-abortion governor. Yet he became a very pro-life president. He repented and regretted the evil he supported.

We must bravely witness against supporting pro-choice and pro-abortion candidates in political elections, but pray daily for their conversion.

This is a great time to be a Catholic. This is a great time to witness to such a clear choice, the choice of Christ or the anti-Christ.

We have only one life to live, and Jesus is it!

If our focus consists only in counting votes, we will be discouraged. If our focus is on giving ourselves and our activities totally to Christ so that He can use our witnessing as He wishes, our hearts will be throbbing and radiating with life and joy.

This is a great time to wake up from our slumber of simply calling ourselves Catholic, and wage war against the forces of darkness in ourselves first and then in our culture, a culture which is resting on the premise that God does not exist.

Our actions and our lifestyles have to radiate the inner presence of Christ in the home and in the marketplace.

This is a glorious day and a glorious opportunity for any follower of Christ! We need to recover our Catholic identity, and we can do it!

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!

Archbishop Burke Faults Faithful Citizenship; Calls for Overhall of Catholic News Service

I am in the process of making a rather extensive photo post with pictures I took at the Installation Mass of Archbishop Vigneron. However, I could not pass this up....so savor this piece of real clear communication....

Archbishop Raymond L. Burke is a voice of reason and common sense among bishops. There was a time when you could only count on hearing a dose of truth from Bishops Bruskewitz and Burke (and they were often dismissed like the proverbial "nutty aunt in the closet", or downright vilified by secular media, and among dissident Catholics). Those chaotic days before the election revealed bishops are now acting on a dose of grace in the form of holy boldness.

Let's hope we get some backbone into this by more bishops. CNS has long been the target of complaints by loyal Catholics dismayed at the lack of substance on heavy moral issues.

Exclusive Interview: Leading Vatican Prelate Says Document of US Bishops Partly to Blame for Election of “Most Pro-Abortion President”

Also says Bishops’ Catholic News Service needs to be given "some new direction"

By Hilary White, Rome Correspondent

ROME, January 28, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A document of the US Catholic Bishops is partly to blame for the abandonment of pro-life teachings by voting Catholics and the election of the “most pro-abortion president” in US history, one of the Vatican’s highest officials said in an interview with LifeSiteNews.com.

Archbishop Raymond Burke, the prefect of the Apostolic Signatura, named a document on the election produced by the US Conference of Catholic Bishops that he said “led to confusion” among the faithful and led ultimately to massive support among Catholics for Barack Obama.

The US bishops’ document, “Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship,” stated that, under certain circumstances, a Catholic could in good conscience vote for a candidate who supports abortion because of "other grave reasons," as long as they do not intend to support that pro-abortion position. [so many people I know used this as justification.]

Archbishop Burke, the former Archbishop of St. Louis Mo. and recently appointed head of the highest ecclesiastical court in the Catholic Church, told LifeSiteNews.com that although “there were a greater number of bishops who spoke up very clearly and firmly ... there was also a number who did not.”

But most damaging, he said, was the document “Faithful Citizenship” that “led to confusion” among the voting Catholic population.

“While it stated that the issue of life was the first and most important issue, it went on in some specific areas to say ‘but there are other issues’ that are of comparable importance without making necessary distinctions.”

Archbishop Burke, citing an article by a priest and ethics expert of St. Louis archdiocese, Msgr. Kevin McMahon, who analysed how the bishops’ document actually contributed to the election of Obama, called its proposal “a kind of false thinking, that says, ‘there’s the evil of taking an innocent and defenceless human life but there are other evils and they’re worthy of equal consideration.’

“But they’re not. The economic situation, or opposition to the war in Iraq, or whatever it may be, those things don’t rise to the same level as something that is always and everywhere evil, namely the killing of innocent and defenceless human life.”

Archbishop Burke also cited the work of the official news service of the US Catholic Bishops’ Conference, that many pro-life observers complained soft-pedalled the newly elected president’s opposition to traditional morality.

“The bishops need to look also at our Catholic News Service, CNS, they need to review their coverage of the whole thing and give some new direction, in my judgement,” he said. [read that, "overhaul it!]

LifeSiteNews Source Page

I am 46 years of age, and have never heard a priest talk about abortion or other pro-life issues from the pulpit until I got to Assumption Grotto in May of 2005. How can this be, if the very men charged with guarding us from "all sorts of strange teachings" don't identify them and help us to navigate those waters?

There is a crisis of knowledge about the faith on the part of most Catholics today (and I don't think that is an exaggeration). This has permeated many Catholic organizations, including administrative offices in dioceses and in the USCCB where decisions are made on a daily basis on ordinary things that affect how good or bad things are communicated. It affects the so-called "catholic" movie reviews out of the USCCB that have sparked considerable controversy, and reactions from many bishops (recall Brokeback Mountain and the Golden Compass).

There is what the Church teaches, and there is what people think the Church teaches. Moreso, there is what people want the Church to teach, but these folks don't stop to ask themselves if there can be 10 versions of one truth (if each forms truth according to his own opinion). Jesus Christ is Truth itself (John 14:6) and there cannot be more than one Jesus. The Church has 2000 years of experience and wisdom, backed by the Church Fathers, the apostles, Sacred Scripture, and Magisterial teachings.

Many priests will follow their chief shepherd's ways. If he is graced with holy boldness and stands as confident and firm as a captain on the high seas in a gale, his priests will follow his lead. If he speaks with ambiguity and banality on the most pressing moral issues of the day, so will his priests.

If you want to take back the Church, pray for our bishops and priests. Go to adoration, pray a Rosary, make sacrifices and do penance for them.

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!

Bishop Robert Vasa of Baker, OR: Those who profess to love God, but back abortion, are liars

H/T to Fr. Z for this great article out of Baker, Oregon.

At the bottom are some links you will want to explore if you like what this bishop has to say.

Those who profess to love God, but back abortion, are liars

Print Edition: 01/15/2009
By Bishop Robert Vasa

BEND — The Mass readings for the week between Epiphany and the Baptism of the Lord are taken from the First Letter of St. John. These readings are not always used for it often happens, depending upon the day on which Christmas falls, that the season of ordinary time begins immediately after the celebration of Epiphany. This year, however, the occurrence of Christmas allowed for a full week between these two post-Christmas celebrations and thus the readings from St. John’s first letter. As often happens, the daily Mass readings are both appealing and challenging. The reading of Thursday from I John 4:19ff is particularly appropriate in this year when the life issues are very much on the minds of pro-life persons.

The reason for the increased awareness and even concern on the part of the pro-life community is the specter of the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) which is highly rumored to be in the works at the federal level. It is this act which has stimulated the bishops of the United States to launch a massive postcard campaign calling upon the House and Senate to abandon FOCA. While further details about the dramatic impact of FOCA on our American culture can be found in many places, I will simply say that it would establish abortion as a federally protected right and, as I understand it, preclude state limitation or regulation of abortion. Further, since abortion would be a federally protected right, it is very possible that even Catholic health care institutions and Catholic Physicians would be mandated to provide this heinous service.

Thus I strongly urge all who have a glimmer of concern for the lives of pre-born children to engage themselves in this postcard campaign. This is not an action which would limit or alter present permissive abortion laws, which some so-called Catholic pro-choice persons might object to, it would simply preclude a dramatic expansion of that permissiveness. Thus it would be very difficult for any Catholic, no matter how much in favor of abortion itself, to find a reason to refuse to participate in this campaign. At the same time, I do not see how any Catholic senator or representative could vote for the passage of FOCA without recognizing that such a vote would constitute a direct and intentional declaration of their disdain for Catholic teaching. Such a vote would be tantamount to a public declaration of their intention to abandon the Catholic faith. It would be imperative that the faith consequences of such a declaration be allowed to fall fully on the heads of those who would make it.

The writing from St. John applies: “Beloved, we love God because He first loved us. If anyone says, ‘I love God,’ but hates his brother, he is a liar; for whoever does not love a brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen. This is the commandment we have from Him: Whoever loves God must also love his brother.”
We of the Catholic faith certainly know that love of God is central to our tenets, this is the appealing part. It is hard to imagine a Catholic saying, “I am a Catholic in good standing but I do not love God.” But the inspired scriptures tell us that whoever does not love his brother or neighbor does not and, indeed, cannot love God. This is the challenging part. The people of Jesus’ day understood this and it was this understanding that prompted them to ask, “And who is my neighbor?” For all of us, and especially for Catholic legislators in every strata of government, it is necessary to declare, in conformity with the Natural Law and the teaching of the Catholic Church that, the pre-born child is our brother, our sister, our neighbor!

It may sound a little strong to state that legislators “hate” the pre-born child but hate is an absence of love and love means to wish another well. There is nothing about abortion that wishes the pre-born child well. The preservation of abortion “rights” is already an absence of love for the pre-born child but the passage of FOCA could be construed as nothing less than active and positive disregard, even hatred, for these our brothers and sisters. To paraphrase St. John, “If anyone says, ‘I love God,’ but votes for FOCA, thus showing a disregard for his pre-born brother or sister, he is a liar.” Lots of things can be rationalized in government but I do not see any way in which any Catholic could rationalize or justify an affirmative vote for FOCA.

It is not necessary for your postcards to be as outspoken as this bishop but you do have an obligation to participate in this concerted effort to show love for the tiniest and most defenseless of our brothers and sisters. President-elect Obama made it very clear, prior to the election, that he would happily sign FOCA and the millions of Catholics who voted for him hopefully did so for reasons other than this promise and certainly not because of it. It seems to me that it is particularly incumbent upon these same voters to make it clearly known to their representatives that their vote may not in any way be taken as a sign of support for FOCA.

Another way in which we show our affirmative love for our pre-born brothers and sisters is by way of our annual memorial on Jan. 22. This year the Diocesan Office of Pro-life Activities has scheduled a rosary and Mass at St. Joseph’s in Prineville on Thursday evening, Jan. 22. The rosary will commence at 6:30 p.m. with Mass beginning at 7 p.m. While I recognize that many parishes host similar memorial Masses to pray for the two-fold victims of abortion, the child and the mother, I invite any who can to join me at the rosary and Mass at St. Joseph’s in Prineville.

Regardless of how many years have passed since the Roe vs. Wade Supreme Court Decision and regardless of how prevalent and routine abortion has become in this country, the simple truth remains, it is an act of extreme violence to the pre-born child and to the distressed mother. Thus, if anyone says, “I love God” and still favors abortion, he is, to quote St. John, a liar. May we all live out faithfully what it means to love God.

More on Bishop Vasa:

• A Must Read for Catholics: A Bishop's Humble Admission about Fear and Courage


• ***Giving Testimony to the Truth: A Pastoral Letter for Diocesan Lay Ministers (Read this and ask your own bishop for something similar. This should be in every diocese!!!)
  


• Bishop Vasa regarding his Vacation
  

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!

Bishop Jamie Soto takes the Helm in Sacramento

Bishop Jamie Soto, who has served for a year as the co-adjutor of Sacramento has taken the reigns from Bishop William Weigand.

Yes.....that Jamie Soto!

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!

The Bishop's backbones are getting stronger!

It is a true pleasure to continue reading stories of Bishops who are speaking up in their dioceses to clarify Catholic teaching on voting. There have been many misrepresentations in the popular press by politicians trying to gain votes for themselves or others.

I don't have time to put the whole thing up and Fr. Z has it formatted well, with comments. This one is a realy dandy!

Go read: Joint Statement of the Bishops of Dallas and Forth Worth, USA

There are more to come. I encourage you to check in on Fr. Z's blog daily. There are some other great news items there too, but I must get off to bed. 4:30 comes early.

I am also behind on making some other posts and hope I will get to them. Time has been tight.


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!

Feast of St. Francis of Assisi

It is well known that St. Francis had a special relationship with all creatures. One of the most famous stories affiliated with Francis and the creatures was that of the infamous wolf of Gubbio.

The wolf had been terrorizing the town of Gubbio to the point that no one wanted to go outside of the city walls. It was killing livestock and people. Francis did not go out of the city walls with intent to take down the wolf with violence. When it charged him and his companion, he made the sign of the cross and beckoned the wolf to come to him, assuring the creature that he meant him no harm. He commanded him to stop his violent ways and took the wolf back to the town where a pact was made between him and the people. He would not harm them and they would feed him which they did for two years until he died of old age.

Some would say this is a legend while others believe it to be a true story. I think there is something of greater importance here to learn from the story. It's not about animals, but in how we deal with other people.

Through the example of St. Francis we can see that no matter how bad another person is, authentic Christian LOVE can conquer all for that is what Francis did - he loved the wolf into submission.

LOVE for others, especially for those who persecute us, is a fruit of love for God. When we truly love Him, we cannot but love our neighbor, even with all of his faults. However, this does not mean that we should tip-toe around truth.

Loving others in spite of their faults not only applies to Catholic politicians who distort Catholic teaching to advance their political aims, but to fellow parishioners, co-workers, and family members who annoy us. The example of St. Francis, and ultimately Christ, was that we must accept the cross of persecution out of love for God, especially to advance truth. It is in this love that we will win more souls for Christ.

US BISHOPS CONFRONTING "WOLF OF GUBBIO"
Our bishops have shown us that persecution can be fought, which is what St. Francis did when he confronted the wolf on his own turf. A great example today of fighting with love is that of Bishop Jamie Soto in Sacramento, who recently accepted the request to be keynote speaker at the National Association for Diocesan Gay and Lesbian Ministries. The bishop did not exercise false charity by sidestepping truth with regards to the issue of sex in and out of the context of marriage. He stood up and taught the truth, but with great love. This love is seen in his speech, and further, in his wish to remain afterwards to talk personally with those to whom he delivered the address, even if they did not comprehend how it could be love. We must pray for them.

Other bishops have also been speaking up - a fruit that Fr. Z rightly believes is stemming from Pope Benedict's visit to the US. See his article: What Benedict sowed in April, Bishops are reaping today.

Another recent example is that of Bishop Martino of Sacramento, PA who has ordered that his pastoral letter be read at all Masses this weekend for Respect Life Sunday. Out of love and truth, the Bishop speaks forcefully about Catholic teaching on voting and on Catholic politicians.

Yes. The bishops are learning how to deal with the "wolf of Gubbio" in their own backyards. Let's pray for them that they continue to exercise courageous love to strip the Church from all that has ailed her.

OMNIBUS OF SOURCES - WRITINGS OF ST. FRANCIS
If you really want to get to the heart of Franciscan thinking, go with original writings. One book I had was an english version of these writings compiled in one book. It has been reprinted into a two-volume paperback edition and can be found cheapest at Christ the King bookstore online. I had this book in the 80's and left it behind in Europe. I thought it was lost forever until I found that link. Knowing today how translations have been watered down, I can't attest as to whether this book was subject to good or poor translation. I do know that I learned a great deal from it and have ordered it so that I may once again reference the many great writings found in it.


PRAYER OF ST. FRANCIS

Lord, make me an instrument of your peace.
Where there is hatred, let me sow love;
where there is injury,pardon;
where there is doubt, faith;
where there is despair, hope;
where there is darkness, light;
and where there is sadness, joy.


O Divine Master, grant that I may not so much seek
to be consoled as to console;
to be understood as to understand;
to be loved as to love.
For it is in giving that we receive;
it is in pardoning that we are pardoned;
and it is in dying that we are born to eternal life. Amen








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!

Bishop shocks participants with truthful teaching at gay and lesbian Catholic conference

Add Bishop Jamie Soto, Co-Adjutor of Sacramento, California to our Bishops with Backbone list.

Bishop Soto was invited by the National Association of Catholic Diocesan Lesbian and Gay Ministries to speak at it's fall conference. He accepted the invititation to be the keynote speaker and did the unthinkable to the dismay of the audience: He catechized them. Several people walked out during his talk and the host later apologized to the audience explaining, "On behalf of the board, I apologize. We had no idea Bishop Soto was going to say what he said."

From the California Catholic Daily: Bishop Soto stuns national homosexual ministries conference. Emphasis mine. Comments in red and in brackets.

“At least five members of the audience walked out”
Bishop Soto stuns national homosexual ministries conference


(Editor’s Note: For the complete text of the bishop’s speech, see related story in today’s edition, “It is sinful.”)

When two Catholics from Southern California learned that Sacramento Coadjutor Bishop Jaime Soto was to be the keynote speaker at the National Association of Catholic Diocesan Lesbian and Gay Ministries conference in Long Beach on Sept. 18, they decided to attend themselves to see and hear the talk in person. They say what they witnessed was a bishop who “courageously but gently” gave a clear presentation of Church teaching on sexuality.

After California Catholic Daily reported on Bishop Soto’s plans to attend and speak at the conference (“Birds of a feather?” Sept. 15, 2008), many readers expressed disapproval or worry over how to interpret the soon-to-be Bishop of Sacramento’s decision. Bishop Soto will take over the diocese from retiring Bishop William Weigand on Nov. 30. The National Association of Catholic Diocesan Lesbian and Gay Ministries, based in Berkeley, is a network of local ministries that has the reputation of taking, at best, an ambiguous stance on the moral character of homosexuality and homosexual acts [an interesting note is that among the many "ambiguous and not so ambiguous links on the site of this organization, no where to be found is a link to the sanctioned Catholic apostolate, Courage, which was inspired by Terrence Cardinal Cooke. The apostolate ministers to people with homosexual orientation and helps them to live the same kind of chaste life that other single people must live.]

But there was nothing ambiguous about Bishop Soto’s remarks to the group. “Sexual relations between people of the same sex can be alluring for homosexuals, but it deviates from the true meaning of the act and distracts them from the true nature of love to which God has called us all,” Bishop Soto said. “For this reason, it is sinful. Married love is a beautiful, heroic expression of faithful, life-giving, life-creating love. It should not be accommodated and manipulated for those who would believe that they can and have a right to mimic its unique expression."

At least five members of the audience walked out during the bishop’s address. When he finished speaking, there was general silence -- with only a very small number applauding.

The chairman of the conference then announced that the bishop would answer questions at a reception that would be held in another room. [He didn't just throw the teachings of the Church out there then head out a side door - he stayed to talk about what he said]. That led to widespread expressions of disapproval from members of the audience, who said they wanted to be able to express their responses immediately. It was agreed that those who wanted to speak would line up. The bishop was told twice by the chairman that he was free to leave if he wanted -- or to stay and listen. Bishop Soto stayed and sat quietly listening to every response.

A series of about eight speakers came to the microphone to express their unhappiness with what the bishop had said -- and what they felt he had not said. One woman said, in essence, "We know what the Church says. What we wanted you to talk about is the value of our lived experience as lesbian women and gay men."

Two speakers -- one man and one woman -- thanked the bishop for his address and voiced their agreement with what he had to say.

While the audience members were responding to the bishop’s remarks, a board member of the National Association of Catholic Diocesan Lesbian and Gay Ministries came up to one of the tables in the room and said, "On behalf of the board, I apologize. We had no idea Bishop Soto was going to say what he said."

Just like single people who choose to be single, or like those who want to be married but cannot find a spouse, all are called to chastity, regardless of sexual orientation. I don't know who it was, but one of the priests on EWTN once explained that our brothers and sisters with homosexual inclinations carry a much heavier cross in life. For many, marriage is not an option leaving celibacy as the only option. We should have compassion for everyone, but what the bishop teaches is that ministry involves truth, not ambiguity or false charity.

It is refreshing to see that a bishop is willing to stand up and teach the truth and make himself available for discussion.



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!