More lies and defiance from Catholic pro-aborts

This week, 55 House Democrats will release a six-paragraph "Statement of Principles By Fifity-Five Catholic Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives."

The names of most are not known yet, but a few are at least partly pro-life, incongruously enough. For those who are unambiguously pro-abortion, we should keep an eye out for which ones might be from our Archdiocese of Los Angeles.

Only part of the text is out; Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne, Jr., has supplied some of it. It is clear that they really need to call their blurb, "Statement of Evasion of Principles..."

They call themselves "part of the living Catholic tradition." That is significant, of course, because by "living" they mean "changing to mean whatever we want it to mean." Their ilk call the U.S. Constitution a "living" document, too.

They also say that "Catholic tradition...expresses a consistent moral framework for life..." That is the "seamless garment" that renders the abortions of tens of millions of American babies not the preeminent issue but just one of many.

Then they actually say, "...we work every day to advance respect for human life..." They should add, "Except for the 4,000 babies whose deaths we facilitate every day."

They go on to claim, "...each of us is committed to reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies and creating an environment with policies that encourage pregnancies to be carried to term." Notice how they studiously avoid the word "babies." And they should add, "Year after year, we keep saying we want to reduce the number of abortions -- but we don't ever follow through, so tough pazookies for the babies."

They continue by openly defying Holy Mother Church: "...we seek the church's guidance and assistance, but believe also in the primacy of conscience." They should add,"Notice how we don't respect the Church enough to capitalize 'Church'; and our idea of 'conscience' is what NOW, NARAL and PP tell us it is."

They close by pulling out an old chestnut: "...we acknowledge and accept the tension that comes from being in disagreement with the church in some areas." They should add, "By 'some areas" we mean aborting babies and pushing homosexuality; and by 'tension' we mean that we laugh at your supine failure to call us to account."

The bishop of every one of these traitors to the Church and the Culture of Life should excommunicate them the day the statement comes out. Cardinal Mahony, please do your clear duty if any of these moral monsters are under your jurisdiction.

Will Cardinal Mahony follow Philippines bishops' example?

Did you see the amazing news story from the Philippines last week? (Click on the title of this post.) The Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines is taking strong and effective action to counter moral decay and the government's totalitarian pro-abortion, pro-contraception, population control offensive against the people.

The bishops are requiring the Catholics of every parish in the country to take the pro-life Basic Ecclesiastical Communities Seminar. It is a course, held on eight straight Sundays, on basic Catholic teaching, the Bible, salvation history, Christian leadership, "the changing Church" and "family and life apostles." The course emphasizes that artificial contraception is immoral.

That alone is great, but the amazing part is that, according to LifeSiteNews, "The bishops are firm on the necessity of participating in the seminars before being allowed to receive sacraments." Individual bishops and priests may decide who is to receive the sacraments and Christian burial.

"That's the idea," says Sister Regina Arguelles of the Daughters of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. "That's exactly the Church's message. IF YOU WANT TO BE A CATHOLIC, ACT LIKE ONE AND FOLLOW THE CHURCH'S TEACHINGS." [emphasis added]

So, how soon will Cardinal Mahony get a copy of this pro-life seminar curriculum and implement it throughout the Archdiocese? A great time to announce it would be at the opening of this year's Religious Education Conference, don't you think?

"Clip and save" these quotes from the Popes and saints

Many thanks to Semper Fi Catholic for the following quotes, which he supplied in a comment he made about the recent post, "It is love, not hate, to oppose dissent."

Be sure to check out Semper Fi Catholic's very apt and accurate comments there about fraternal correction and true judgment. And here are the quotes he sent:

"It is an act of charity to cry out against the wolf when he is among the sheep."
-- St. Francis de Sales

"A failure to speak the truth because of a misconceived sense of compassion should not be taken for love. We do not have the right to minimize matters of our own accord, even with the best of intentions. Our task is to be God's witnesses, to be spokesmen of a mercy that saves 'even when it shows itself as JUDGMENT' on man's sin."
-- Pope John Paul II, 2002 Letter to Priests

"Sins that are manifest are not to be cleansed by secret correction, but those who sin openly are to be censured openly, that when they are cured by a public reproof, those who imitated their sin may imitate their amendment."
-- Pope St. Gregory the Great

"He who neglects to put right what he can correct is undoubtedly guilty of the fault of the person sinning."
-- St.Leo

"To be silent when you should reprove, is to consent; and we know that the same punishment awaits those who do wrong, and those who consent to it."
-- St. Bernard

Archbishop O'Malley and Teddy Kennedy

This post reproduces my rather lengthy reply to a comment that a good friend of this blog, Venerable Aussie, has made at my most recent post, "He's a bishop, not a squishop." (You can see his comment there, of course.)

Dear Venerable Aussie,

Thank you for your posts and your good recommendations. Please keep them coming!

I try to practice the desire to be very careful in what we say about others. But if I make a point or two about Archbishop O'Malley, I hope you'll understand me.

Of course, he does good things that deserve support. But there are some problems.

Soon-to-be-Cardinal O'Malley's policy boils down to this: He will give Communion to notorious, unrepentant politicians who time and again go out of their way to publicly defy Holy Mother Church by supporting the homosexual agenda and by promoting the killing of millions of BABIES.

Teddy Kennedy is guilty not only of those evils but of another one that few even know about: He is a direct persecutor of his fellow Catholics, including priests, who are pro-life activists.

Kennedy helped ramrod the FACE (Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances) Act, which made it a federal crime to hold peaceful sit-ins to block abortionists from plying their bloody racket.

A photo showed Teddy Kennedy and his cronies grinning gloatingly and evilly as Clinton signed that monstrous persecution-of-priests-and-other-Catholics bill.

Can you blame pro-lifers for holding that the hierarchy and clergy should withhold Communion from such politicians? And for holding that excommunication might be in order, as a measure of charity -- toward the politicos for the good of their souls, and to enlighten the faithful?

It is not enough to leave it up to pro-aborts and persecutors whether to receive Communion. A bishop-like bishop would decide that.

Archbishop O'Malley was installed in Boston on July 30, 2003. The day before, his office said pro-abortion politicians should not receive. But both Teddy Kennedy and John Kerry, and probably other pro-aborts, received anyway.

By defying the new Archbishop in his first moments "in office," these powerful politicians spit in his eye like bullies saying, "What are you going to do about it?"

They were also spitting at the Bride of Christ, the Church.

Sure, they took advantage of the new Archbishop -- but he could have prevented that entirely by taking strong, bishop-like actions such as disinviting them ahead of time and by refusing Communion if they dared to show up.

Archbishop O'Malley did a good thing last December by refusing to attend a Boston Catholic Charities dinner that honored Thomas Menino, the notorious pro-abortion, pro-homosexual mayor of Boston.

But he could have taken an even stronger, bishop-like action by ordering Catholic Charities to disinvite Menino, and by scrubbing the dinner if they refused.

It would be hard for any bishop to keep up with the number of pro-abortion politicians that Cardinal Mahony has appeared with -- Bill Clinton, Gray Davis, Antonio Villaraigosa, etc., etc.

But we would all be so proud of ANY bishop who would take more forceful, bishop-like action against the pro-aborts -- any bishop who would act more like the slayings of tens of millions of babies are an emergency priority.

Let us pray that Cardinal O'Malley will be more actively pro-life and will also safeguard the Eucharist from pro-abortion politicians.

He's a bishop, not a squishop

Pro-life Bishop Robert Vasa of the Diocese of Bend, Oregon, had been most famous for saying that he answers to Rome, not to the U.S. bishops' conference. Now he has said something just as great (click on this post's title to see it).

In his February 17 column in his diocesan newspaper, The Catholic Sentinel, Bishop Vasa wrote about heresy, saying, "There are...moral teachings [of the Church] that constitute a part of the deposit of faith that must be accepted and adhered to, 'firmly embraced and retained.'"

Bishop Vasa continued, "The truth is that God charges each of us with the duty to protect and defend innocent human life." Then he wrote that being "pro-choice" implicitly rejects "the clear and consistent teaching of the Church" and that voting for a pro-abortion politician because he or she is pro-abortion "is a type of declaration that the teaching of the Church, indeed the validity of the Fifth Commandment itself, is rejected."

Writing that "One brave soul has termed this present rejection of responsibility for one’s pre-born brother or sister the right-to-murder HERESY [emphasis added]," Bishop Vasa concluded, "Our kind and gentle Lord will certainly receive us and help us when we cry out to Him for He is 'meek and humble of heart,' but I suspect he will likewise not mince words with those who reject His Way and His Truth."

What would Bishop Vasa say about Cardinal Mahony, Cardinal McCarrick, soon-to-be Cardinal O'Malley and the other squishops and clergy who pal around with notorious pro-abortion Catholic politicians and even give them Communion? I think that in his February 17 column he has already said it.

Wempe verdict "an indictment of Mahony"

Jurors in Los Angeles on Wednesday convicted retired Father Michael Wempe of one count of homosexual abuse of a minor in the mid-1990's. They deadlocked on the four other counts. An additional trial is possible.

"This is less an indictment of Wempe than of Mahony," said Richard Farnell, according to the Los Angeles Times. Farnell represents six of the 13 victims whom Wempe has admitted homosexually abusing, plus Jayson B., the accuser in the just-concluded trial.

"[Mahony] obviously did not do the right thing," Farnell said. "He covered up for his own selfish benefit.... He knew Wempe was a pedophile and instead of doing the right thing, which called for law enforcement to be contacted, Mahony put him out there and failed to warn parishioners."

Cardinal Mahony assigned Wempe to the chaplain's office at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center after sending him for "psychiatric treatment" in New Mexico.

After the verdict, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP) called on Wempe to "disclose to the police, prosecutors and the public what he knows about Cardinal Roger Mahony and [C]hurch officials' cover-ups of sex crimes..."

We can expect more sex crimes convictions of molester priests whom Cardinal Mahony knowingly reassigned. Next month, the Cardinal must travel to Rome for the new consistory that Pope Benedict XVI has called. For the sake of the Church, he should apologize to the Vicar of Christ and submit his resignation as Archbishop of Los Angeles.

More ways abortion is worse...but there is hope

Here are some more thoughts on my previous post, "Do the math: Abortion and capital punishment." But please, after you read the following thoughts, be sure to read my conclusion, because it offers spiritual consolation and hope to anyone who has had the misfortune to be involved in abortion.

My previous post noted that in simple mathematical terms, abortions are 40,880 times worse (more frequent) than capital punishment in the USA.

But think of all the other ways that abortions are worse, and more unjust, than capital punishment:

The executed baby in the womb has no chance to receive the Sacrament of Baptism. The death row inmate has that chance, as well as the opportunity for years of religious counseling and the Sacrament of Confession if he is Catholic.

The baby in the womb is all alone in the world. The convict has lots of company: A chaplain, if he wants one, relatives, reporters, and death penalty opponents worldwide as well as picketing outside the prison.

The baby has no legal representation. The criminal has decades' worth of criminal defense lawyering and benefits from countless laws enacted in criminals' behalf.

The baby is torn apart alive. The convict gets an injection and has the entire legal and news media establishments lobbying for humane treatment for him.

The baby has no opportunity for the Last Rites and Viaticum. The criminal does.

The baby has no one to pray for him or her. The convict does.

The baby gets no funeral and no grave. The criminal does.

PLEASE keep reading now! The list above is a necessary but very sad one. Now, if you or anyone you know has had the misfortune to be involved in abortion, PLEASE know that Jesus Christ Himself, your Redeemer and mine, loves you more than anything and is waiting with open Heart and arms for you in Confession.

And there is real help for women who have had abortions, from other women who have been in your shoes and have experienced God's healing and forgiveness. Just call your local pro-life groups or parishes, and they will give you love and help.

As the old spiritual says, "There is a balm in Gilead to heal the sin-sick soul." We, all of us, need that balm, and the Good News is, Jesus will supply it.

God bless you and keep you always.

Do the math: Abortions and capital punishment

The on-again, off-again execution of Michael Morales, 46, gangster, drug user, convicted torturer, rapist and murderer in a homosexual plot, is off again.

News reports say that in 1981, Morales, 21, was recruited by his homosexual cousin, Ricky Ortega, 19, to get high-schooler Terri Winchell, 17, because unbeknownst to her, the guy she was going with was secretly a homosexual "partner" of Ortega. (Ortega is doing life without possibility of parole for his part in Terri's murder.)

At their semi-annual meeting last November, our U.S. bishops initiated a major campaign against capital punishment. Not long after that, the 1,000th execution of a death row criminal in the USA since 1977 took place.

Someone has done the math: In the USA, executing 1,000 convicts takes 28 years, and executing 1,000 babies in the womb by abortion takes SIX HOURS. Versus those six hours are the 245,280 hours that constitute 28 years. 6 into 245,280 = 40,880.

So, as anyone can see, abortions are 40,880 times worse (more frequent) than capital punishment.

Tragically, no one can say that our U.S. bishops, clergy and laity, now or ever in the past almost four decades of "legal" abortions in the USA, have spent 40,880 times as much effort fighting abortions as they have the death penalty and other issues.

We should never stop reminding our hierarchy, clergy and everyone else that Pope John Paul II, on a visit to Brazil, called abortion the most unjust EXECUTION of all.

"Just the way we are"

We are all familiar with the refrain, "God loves us just the way we are." Sometimes people who are mired in certain sins, such as active homosexuals, say that to imply they can keep on sinning.

Of course, that does not stand up to analysis. Does God love racists "just the way they are?"

So it was great when a friend repeated the refrain, only with a major qualifier:

"God loves us just the way we are -- but too much to leave us that way."

May we all see and admit our sins, get to Confession, and receive God's forgiveness and the graces to avoid sin and practice virtue. Hmmm...Lent is a good time for that.

Let's make it a pro-life Lent this year

Ash Wednesday is March 1 this year and fast approaching. What prayer, penance and sacrifices are you planning? Let's make it a pro-life Lent this year.

We each need to get close to Christ Crucified on the hill of Golgotha during Lent. Today's closest equivalent to Golgotha is the abortion mills. At each such place of execution, Innocence is betrayed, tortured and put to death for pieces of silver.

We each need to get close to the Mother of Christ during Lent. She was at Golgotha. The Stabat Mater Dolorosa tells us, "At the Cross her station keeping, Stood the mournful Mother weeping, Close to Jesus to the last."

We can contact our local pro-life sidewalk counselors or pray-ers and go with them to the execution sites. Do not be nervous if you have never been there before. You do not have to taking a leading role; you can simply pray the Rosary. Seeing people at prayer outside abortion mills results in "turnaways" and baby-saves!

We can ask our pastors and assistant priests, our deacons, and our consecrated religious to lead prayer at the abortion mills. Their presence results in saves.

At every daily Mass, when they ask the congregation for petitions, you can speak up and ask prayers for the closing of your local abortion mills, for the conversion of the abortionists and their staffs, and for more people to go out to the mills to offer compassionate help and alternatives to everyone tempted by abortion.

We can give up treats and entertainments, save up the money they would have cost, and either donate it to local pro-lifers or buy baby goods for homes for unwed moms.

We can take part in the new drive to gather signatures of registered voters to get the new parental-notification-before-abortion initiative on the ballot this November.

So let us each do our utmost this Lent to save God's precious babies and help their Moms (and Dads) at the modern Golgothas. Surely Jesus and Mary will be pleased. And surely they will be with us, as we strive to be with them.

Update on the Wempe trial

The jurors in the child molestation trial of Michael Wempe, 66, retired priest of the Archdiocese of Los Angeles, told the judge on Friday that they have reached a verdict on one count but have deadlocked on the other four counts.

The jurors have some questions. The judge, Curtis Rappe, told the jurors to return on Tuesday (Monday is the Presidents' Day holiday). According to the Associated Press, he said he might let the lawyers on both sides make additional statements that might answer the jurors' questions.

Wempe's attorney, Leonard Levine, continues to say that no one has accused Wempe of crimes since 1987, except for Jayson B., the current accuser.

This was in the LA Daily News on Friday: "Deputy District Attorney Todd Hicks had said that Wempe was 'a priest in name only; he was never a man of God.' He had called Wempe a 'stone-cold pedophile' and a clear and present danger 'to all the world, particularly young children.'"

That assessment of Wempe differs noticeably from the one that Cardinal Mahony must have had when he assigned him to be a chaplain at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in the period after Wempe's treatment in New Mexico in 1987.

The real picture here is this...

The real picture here is that in a little more than a month, a gigantic "congress" is going to affect nearly 40,000 Catholic teachers, parish volunteers and youth leaders. This "congress" is blessed by and sponsored by the Ordinary of our Archdiocese. In the past and today, it is peppered with some speakers who have track records of uttering heresies and blasphemies, of sowing doubt about Catholic truth, of disobedience to the Vicar of Christ, of criticism of the Church's teaching authority, of being anti-life, of promoting the homosexual takeover agenda and of recommending and practicing abuses in the liturgy of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

This situation is a danger to the souls of our fellow Catholics, especially kids. Exposing the danger is our duty in both charity and justice. Doing so is clearly not "moaning," "whining," being "surly," or spreading "hate" and "negativity."

Calling attention to attacks against Christ, His Church, the Mass and the priesthood is not going to convert the problematic speakers at "congress." Nor is it going to convert our local pro-abortion politicians, homosexual agitators and enablers, church wreckovators and devotees of liturgical abuses. No one ever said it would.

But it certainly can alert potential "congress" attendees to what is going on. It definitely can wake up people to what Holy Mass in their parish should be or should not be. And it surely can give much-needed encouragement to everyone who is already aware of the problems and is looking for allies in the fight for Catholic truth and the cause of restoring respect for everyone's God-given right to life.

We don't care about politics; we are non-partisan. Our agenda is the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

We need, and want, to hear about the good. We also need, and intend, to help our fellow Catholics recognize and reject evils that are packaged and sold as good.

Archbishop Niederauer's inaugural sermon

On Wednesday, February 15, in St. Mary's Cathedral in San Francisco, Archbishop George Niederauer, "lifelong friend of Cardinal Mahony and Archbishop Levada," was installed as the eighth Archbishop of San Francisco.

Click on the title of this post for the text of his inaugural sermon. As you will see, he says many good things about Jesus, love, the Church, the Eucharist, service, caring for others, leadership and the importance of prayer. He follows many points in Pope Benedict XVI's first encyclical, "Deus Caritas Est" ("God Is Love").

On the Church and politics, the Archbishop summarized the Pope's position as being "that [Catholic] social doctrine does not give the [C]hurch power over the state, nor is it meant to impose faith and its practice on non-believers."

The Archbishop called this "most significant." But inasmuch as the filthy rich abortion industry and and its pro-abortion politician sycophants always say the Church wants to "impose its views [sic] on society," let us hope the Archbishop is not implying that the Church should not work to see aborting babies made illegal.

After all, the whole purpose of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (the bishops' huge lobby in Washington, D.C.) is to "impose faith and its practice on non-believers" and believers in the areas of social welfare, immigration, etc.

But the Archbishop continued, "It is principally the responsibility of the lay faithful to work for a just ordering of society."

Archbishop Niederauer quoted the Pope about the need for "the concrete practice of love," but he said nothing about San Francisco's courageous pro-life movement.

He also said nothing specific about San Francisco's large homosexual movement and its constant blasphemy, anti-Catholicism and vicious anti-life politics and culture. He did say, "...disagree without being disagreeable. Presume good faith until it is proven otherwise."

He also said, "Please presume that if the Church challenges an action, a policy or a program, it is because she loves the world around her, and wants what is best for it...Always presume that it is love that led to a quarrel, and that love will endure when the quarrel is passed."

The Archbishop also quoted the English poet T. S. Eliot on why the modern world is not "particularly fond of the Church": "She is hard where they would be easy, and easy where they would be hard." The Archbishop then said, "'Hard where they would be easy:' think of abortion and euthanasia. 'Easy where they would be hard:' think of capital punishment and immigration law."

But why is it being "hard" on anyone to say the law should return to protecting preborn babies and their moms from abortion IMPOSED by predatory, domineering men and the pitiless abortion profiteers? And why is it being "hard" to protect elderly, infirm and handicapped people from death IMPOSED by greedy relatives, lawyers, "ethicists," doctors, hospital boards and insurance companies?

"The concrete practice of love" is nowhere better carried out than in the selfless service and heroic sacrifices of the pro-life movement. And while we "presume good faith" and "disagree without being disagreeable," the abortionists' relentless slaughter of 4,000 American babies every day goes right on, unchallenged.

What are the fruits of the Religious Education Congress?

If the annual Religious Education Congress is so good for the Faith, what with tens of thousands of religion teachers and others going out from it every year and spending the next 12 months "sharing" the speakers' "insights" with their students and others...

Then how come, during the REC's decades of existence...

...so many Catholics no longer know the fundamentals of the Faith, or they "question" basic Catholic truth, or they disregard the Church's Divinely granted authority in faith and morality?

...so few Catholics receive the Sacrament of Reconciliation (Confession) anymore?

...so many high school and college students, and older Catholics too, leave the Faith and become "nothings," defect to Protestantism, join non-Christian sects such as the Mormons and the Witnesses, or end up as New Agers, Buddhists, etc.?

...so many of the "nothings" and others live just like pagans, not marrying, marrying outside the Church, not having children, and aborting, contracepting and being sterilized, and if they do have children, depriving them of Baptism?

...so many Catholic families in this Archdiocese have had one or more of their children, and sometimes all of them, abandon the Faith?

...once-plentiful vocations to the priesthood, as well as to the religious life, have disappeared or gone elsewhere, so much so that the Archdiocese has even shut down its minor and college seminaries?

Now, clearly these tragedies are not exclusive to this Archdiocese, and clearly they have many causes and clearly "Congress" is not responsible for all of them. But again, it is fair to ask...if "Congress" is so good, why are have the problems above occurred to such a degree and why are they continuing?

Could there be a connection between the quality of catechesis in the Archdiocese and the problems into which so many of the catechized have fallen?

But let me make it clear that, obviously, some good speakers do attend "Congress" and some good does come from it. But is it not true that EVERY speaker at such an event should be orthodox and pro-life and that none should have bad track records?

About "understanding" false teachers

Here are excerpts from a commentary I made tonight on a comment about my most recent post, and following them are a few more thoughts of mine.

"It is a common debater's tactic to impute attitudes and motives to your opponent that he does not have. To quote St. Paul and the Popes against public dissenters is simply that, to quote them; it is not to liken oneself to them. And to point out that dissenters dissent is not 'hatred.'

"Only God can judge the state of our souls. We all need His mercy. But that does not mean we should be silent when people make blatant attacks on the Church and the right to life, when glaring problems beset the Church and when unwary Catholics are being told that sins are not sins."

I would add that being forceful and forthright in tone does not equal, as some think, lacking compassion and understanding. Remember that the first three Spiritual Works of MERCY are to Counsel the Doubtful, to Instruct the Ignorant and to Admonish the Sinner. Sounding "understanding" is not going to convert longtime, obstinate, prideful public dissenters who dare to deceive religion teachers into going home and parroting their false doctrines to Catholic youth.

We would protect a child from a rattlesnake; how much more do we need to protect our children and their immortal souls from evil, death-dealing, soul-killing heresy!

St. Vibiana, holy virgin and martyr and patroness of our Archdiocese, pray for us and for our Catholic teachers and Catholic children! Amen.

It is love, not hate, to oppose dissent

A few people who comment on yours truly's posts here claim that it is uncharitable and, to use typical dissenter cliches, "hating," "judgmental" and "divisive" to warn our fellow Catholics against false teachers and their false teachings.

No doubt, then, these commenters would condemn Pope John Paul II for saying these words in Manila in January 1995: "Genuine love...cannot be separated from truth....UNITY springs from conversion of heart and from sincere ACCEPTANCE of the UNCHANGING PRINCIPLES laid down by Christ for His Church." [my emphases]

And no doubt the commenters would really be mad at Pope John Paul II for the following command that he gave on December 14, 1998: "Set your face resolutely against ALL that might harm the Faith." [my emphasis]

A friend of mine notes that even as dissenters accuse faithful Catholics of being "hate-filled" and "angry," they themselves feel free to vent hatred and anger on the Pope, Church documents, canonized saints and even Scripture verses -- anyone who dares contradict their obviously "infallible" heretical dissenter fantasies.

So once again I say that it is an act of true LOVE to urge false teachers to repent and to warn unsuspecting Catholics about those who seek to lead them astray.

More about CRCOA and picketing the REC

For more information on CRCOA's planned protest of this year's Religious (mis-)Education Congress (REC), please see my comments under the post "Come pray and protest at the Cardinal's dissent-fest." Thanks in advance for checking it out!

Come pray and protest at the Cardinal's dissent-fest

Mark your calendar! You're invited to join Concerned Roman Catholics of America (CRCOA) in picketing, praying the Rosary and handing out revealing flyers at Cardinal Mahony's annual Religious (mis)Education Congress (REC), slated for March 30-April 2, 2006.

A full-page ad in the national Catholic weekly The Wanderer (February 2) urges Catholics to "Stop Cardinal Mahony's subversion of Catholic doctrine at the world's largest dissent-fest!" At this year's REC (rhymes with "wreck"), almost 40,000 people, mostly religion teachers, will hear 202 speakers, including many of the most notorious dissenters to Church teachings.

After four days at the feet of pro-"gays," priestess advocates, occultists, anti-Pope rebels and Mass-mutilaters, the teachers will return home and infect millions of children's minds and souls with the heresies and dissenting ideas the Cardinal put in their heads.

The REC will be held at the Anaheim Convention Center. CRCOA will picket the confab and give attendees handouts that expose the worst speakers and warn participants about the spiritual dangers that await them inside.

When CRCOA picketed a past Congress ("Regress," is more like it), the Cardinal mocked them as "simple people, without influence."

Oh, really? The late Msgr. Charles Fortier, Assistant Director of the L. A. Archdiocese's Family Life Office, told CRCOA leader Ken Fisher, "Don't believe it when they say that your efforts at the REC are not having any effect. If that were truly so, why would they be running around here like chickens with their heads cut off, wondering where you'll strike next?"

Put a little Zorro in your spiritual life! Contact (714) 491-2284 or crcoa@dslextreme.com to learn when and where the protest and Rosary will take place.

What did the Cardinal know, and when did he know it?

Back in the 1980s, Cardinal Mahony wants us to believe, he and his fellow bishops had no idea that men who committed sex crimes against boys were incurable (see "Treating priests who abuse: Then and now," The Tidings, January 20, 2006).

This is why, he also wants us to believe, in 1988 he assigned Michael Wempe to the chaplain's office at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center after the priest completed six months of "treatment." And why the Cardinal left Wempe there till 2002, when the clergy sex volcano erupted nationwide and the prelate just happened to ask him to retire.

But there's one small problem with what the Cardinal wants us to believe: in 1985, three years before he returned Wempe to ministry, he and every other U.S. bishop received a secret, 92-page report telling them to sack accused priests immediately, turn them in to the police, and never to send a proven molester out to a new parish (L.A. New Times, May 16, 2002).

There's more: the 1985 document said child molesters have little chance of being cured.

The Cardinal, to be sure, sent Wempe to a hospital, not a parish. But according to the San Francisco Chronicle (May 17, 2002), he did shuffle Fr. Michael Baker among nine different parishes even after Baker had admitted to Mahony in 1986 that he had molested boys.

And, flouting the report to the bishops, the Cardinal never reported Baker to the cops; he sent him for therapy. Plus, in 2000 he secretly paid $1.3 million to two men whom Baker allegedly victimized as boys from 1984 till 1999. The Chronicle article says the Cardinal has told three different stories about his 1986 meeting with Baker.

Oh, one more thing: the secret 1985 report warned the bishops that sex abuse cases could cost the Church in the U.S. $1 billion within 10 years. As U.S. Sen. Everett Dirksen used to say, "A billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon you're talking about real money!"

Cardinal's keynoter disputed Vatican document on homosexuals

It is now going around the Net that the Cardinal's Religious Education Congress keynoter this year, Dominican Father Timothy Radcliffe, presents problems. After the Vatican document on the priesthood and homosexuals was leaked last year, he wrote an essay about it in The Tablet (London) last November, entitled, "Can Gays Be Priests?" Perhaps you can guess what his answer was:

"Having worked with bishops and priests, diocesan and religious, all over the world, I have no doubt that God does call homosexuals to the priesthood, and they are among the most dedicated and impressive priests I have met. So no priest who is convinced of his vocation should feel that this document classifies him as a defective priest. And we may presume that God will continue to call both homosexuals and heterosexuals to the priesthood because the Church needs the gifts of both."

Father Radcliffe did agree with priestly celibacy. But he also wrote these bizarre lines: "We should be more attentive to whom our seminarians may be inclined to hate than whom they love. Racialism, misogyny and homophobia [sic] would all be signs that someone could not be a good model of Christ."

(Sorry, Father, but holding that homosexuals should not be priests is not "hate," nor is it a phobia, nor is it an evil such as racism and misogyny.)

So, for his first "Congress" in the papacy of Benedict XVI, how -- and why -- did Cardinal Mahony pick for his keynote speaker someone who has publicly disputed a major Vatican document? What is going on here?

More on Bishop Niederauer

Sometimes it is useful to check the San Francisco Chronicle online. Today's edition carries a front-page article on Bishop George Niederauer and his final Sunday Mass as Bishop of Salt Lake City, last Sunday.

The article is by Chronicle staff writer Wyatt Buchanan, whom the paper's website says covers "gay and lesbian news." The story links to a 19-minute podcast interview with Bishop Niederauer by Buchanan last Friday. I haven't heard it, but the topics include "gays in the priesthood," contraception and "Brokeback Mountain."

Bishop Niederauer said some good things in the news story Here is an excerpt:

"'It is the constant teaching of the church that sexual activity outside of marriage is a serious offense,' Niederauer said during a wide-ranging interview with The Chronicle on Friday. The [C]hurch, he added, also believes marriage is only for heterosexual couples, and he could not foresee either of those positions evolving anytime soon. 'The words of Christ in the 10th chapter of Mark are not going to change miraculously,' he said in reference to Jesus' description of the holy union of a man and a woman becoming 'one flesh.'"

The article, though, also has this to say:

"Niederauer comes to San Francisco at a time when many in the city's gay and lesbian Catholic population are demoralized by Vatican statements on homosexuality, including the instruction on gay priests published in November that some conservative bishops claim bars all gay men from the priesthood. Niederauer disagrees. The Vatican instruction, which is a clarification of the [C]hurch's teaching, states that men 'who are practicing homosexuals, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called 'gay culture'' should be barred from entering seminaries and the priesthood.

"'I have read the document several times, and I certainly don't hear the document saying, 'Please engage in a witch hunt,' Niederauer said. He said he doubts it will be necessary to change the admission policies at St. Patrick's, the Menlo Park seminary he will oversee, and believes a gay man can meet the criteria of the Vatican document and effectively minister. In San Francisco, Niederauer said, one of his top priorities will be recruiting and training new priests. He noted that Jesus was the first to mention a priest shortage when [H]e said, 'The harvest is great, but the laborers are few.' Niederauer said he will meet with staff and faculty of St. Patrick's soon after his installation as archbishop to discuss seminary policies, including the admission of gay men."

As you can see, the paper ascribes some positions to the Bishop that are not in quotation marks, so there is a chance they might not be entirely accurate.

Bishop Niederauer's installation as Archbishop of San Francisco is set for February 15. He and his predecessor, Archbishop William Levada, were seminary classmates, and they and Cardinal Mahony were in the same ordination class. The latest issue of a California independent Catholic newspaper says that last December 24, the Deseret Morning News, a Salt Lake City newspaper, quoted Bishop Niederauer as saying he and Archbishop Levada own a retirement condo in Long Beach, their hometown.

"Mahony is the leader of the pack"

It's now Week Three of the trial of ex-priest Michael Wempe.

On Monday, Margaret Percival, 64, took the stand. She is the mother of two boys whom Wempe admits molesting and a third who now accuses him of same. When Deputy D.A. Todd Hicks asked her how she felt about Wempe, she bowed her head and wept: "I despise him for what he has done to my children."

Cardinal Mahony assigned Wempe to the chaplain's office at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center after having him "treated" at a center for pedo-priests in 1986. At Cedars, alleges Margaret's son Jayson B., then-priest Wempe committed horrific sex crimes against the boy. (Yes, this is the same Cardinal Mahony who is now the Defender of Children and Scourge of Molesters.)

On Monday, "freelance journalist and lawyer" Eric Berkowitz had an op-ed article in the Los Angeles Times defending the Cardinal's request that the U.S. Supreme Court let him keep secret certain documents in his priests' personnel files. In a letter to the editor on Tuesday, Geoffrey Tozer of Los Angeles seemed less than totally persuaded:

"Cardinal Roger M. Mahony is the leader of this child-molesting pack and deserves more jail time than the rest. I think it's called a conspiracy to cover up. It took down Richard Nixon, and it should take down Mahony."

That must have really hurt the Cardinal. Imagine how he felt, being compared to a Republican.

Perils of going to the Supreme Court

Remember back a decade ago, when Cardinal Mahony let pro-abortion Bill Clinton become the first chief executive to speak in St. Vibiana Cathedral? TV reporter Conan Nolan called it the unofficial kickoff of Clinton's reelection campaign.

Clinton named Justices Breyer and Ginsburg to the U.S. Supreme Court. Now that the Cardinal, through his lawyers, has filed a petition to that same court against District Attorney Steve Cooley's subpoena of clergy personnel files, do you think the Cardinal might be regretting having given a forum to Clinton -- and wishing he had instead tacitly supported a presidential candidate whose Supreme Court picks might have been more friendly to freedom of religion than Clinton's nominees?

Just wondering.

Cardinal, are Catholic hospitals peddling abortion pills?

Are Catholic hospitals in our Archdiocese giving abortifacient drugs to women? Three of them are, according to a new study reported by LifeSiteNews.com on February 3.

Some years ago the pro-abortion, anti-Catholic "Catholics for a Free Choice" commissioned an outfit called "Ibis Reproductive Health" to ask hospitals in four states whether they gave so-called "emergency contraception," which can cause early abortions, to female rape victims. At that time, California, New Mexico, New York and Washington had laws requiring hospitals to push these death potions, with no conscience exceptions for Catholic institutions.

In April of last year, study staff phoned 94 Catholic hospital emergency rooms to see whether they gave women the death potions. According to the callers, Little Company (San Pedro), Saint John's Health Center (Santa Monica) and Marian Medical Center (Santa Maria) are among those that hand out the death drugs on demand, going beyond the state's mandate of counseling and/or providing the drugs only to rape victims.

Dr. John Shea, medical consultant to Canada's respected Campaign Life Coalition, says no Catholic hospital should have anything to do with these potions, because they can kill a new little human life: "Since nobody can tell whether or not the woman has ovulated and nobody can say definitely that the drug will [not] act as an abortion, therefore you can't use it."

Dr. Shea reiterates the age-old Catholic and Scriptural teaching that God's people must "obey the law of God before the State. Even Cicero stated that God's natural law trumped all temporary laws."

From time to time Cardinal Mahony makes fine statements about the sacredness of human life (in fact, used to chair the U.S. Bishops' pro-life committee). Will he phone the heads of those three hospitals in his Archdiocese and, if the report is accurate, make sure that the deadly practice ends and that those responsible are disciplined?

He knows how to put his foot down (to put it mildly!) when he wants to. Let's pray his actions on this live up to his pro-life talk.

"What about all the other issues?"

Here is another exchange of comments about the right to life, repirnted here as a new post because the issues they bring up are so important. First is a response from me, and second is the comment that prompted the response from me.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Not the Original Anonymous,
I can answer your concerns. The pro-life movement and "people on the right" are not synonymous! There are many pro-abortion conservatives and Republicans, and there are liberal pro-lifers.

Second, even if all pro-lifers were "on the right," which they are not, you must admit that both major political parties support massive social spending. Under George W. Bush, social spending is far above what it was under Clinton. By your standards, Clinton must have hated the poor.

So if both major parties support social spending, we cannot use social spending as an excuse to vote for pro-abortion politicians.

Also, there is a good reason I do not write about "other issues."

I have heard the question many a time -- "But what about all the other issues besides abortion?" Or, "Abortion is only one issue."

If you consider the number of the dead that we are talking about, you will realize that asking about issues besides aborting babies is like asking someone in Sudan or Uganda, "But what about all the other issues besides genocide? Genocide is only one issue."

After all, our Roman Catholic Church teaches us that every preborn baby at any stage of growth is every bit as human as anyone already born (see Donum Vitae). Preborn babies are PEOPLE. With abortion in the USA, we are talking about 47 million dead PEOPLE -- slain by abortionist profiteers since the late Sixties.

We each need to ask ourselves: Do we truly believe preborn babies are people, or don't we? And if we believe preborn babies are people, do we need to act like it?

No "other issues" involve anywhere near as many victims as abortion. Plus, the tiny victims of abortion are doubly victimized; not only are they killed (and killed in terrible ways), they are denied the sacrament of Baptism.

This is why you do not see me bringing up "other issues" here. It has to be all right for someone, somewhere, to concentrate on the by-far-the-most-serious issue and not dissipate time and energy trying to cover all issues.

No one, after all, asks anti-death penalty groups to cover all issues. Especially, no one ever asks them to fight abortions! Yet Pope John Paul II, in Brazil, called abortions the most unjust EXECUTIONS of all.

And once again, may I say that there is no call, and no need, for anyone to lecture pro-lifers about the death penalty and social spending and war and anything else. Such lecturing proceeds from the unwarranted assumptions that all pro-lifers are alike and all are conservative Republicans! Sorry, but you would never catch pro-lifers voting for any pro-abortion candidate of any party.

People fail to grasp that the pro-life movement is not about politics. It is about saving babies. But, believing that all pro-lifers are conservatives, the "what about other issues" people shun us. I trust you are not like that, Anonymous!

10:39 PM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anonymous said...
I am not the same Anonymous who originally posted. Although I agree with what you said, he did make some points most people ignore.

Abortion truly is evil and it is right to speak of it as the PRIMARY human rights violation of our day.

At the same time, it does seem that people on the "right" quickly discount John Paul's condemnation of the war in Iraq; white-wash the American involvement in the war; and ignore the human rights violations America is responsible for throughout the world.

In fact, I CANNOT FIND A SINGLE POST ON YOUR BLOG where you ever mention any of these issues. They just don't seem important to you - you don't seem to care at all about them. I don't doubt your sincerity, I believe this may be an unconscious move. But I do think there is a tendency for pro-lifers to affiliate too closely with one political party or to put political idealogy over other concerns.

We need to be one hundred percent pro-life and we can never vote for any politician who promotes abortion. We should even be suspicious of anyone who even fails to condemn it outright. What cowardliness! But we also should have a huge problem voting for people who support a war in which civilians are routinely killed; for those who callously disregard the wisdom of (future) saints like John Paul II.

Other areas could also be mentioned - what of other charitable activities like caring for the homeless or health care? How for example can we be pro-life and not support health care reform. We need to ban abortion - but we also have to provide aid for those children who will be born so parents won't be able to use financial concerns as an excuse to have an abortion. Hilary's program was clearly wrong. But I think idealogical concerns about "big government" are sometimes misplaced. Surely Catholic social teaching tells us that the Republican model of "rugged individualism" is wrong - just as socialism on the other side is. Let's not be reactionary. Let's be Catholic.

Check out this exchange...

Below is an anonymous comment on the recent post "Pope speaks; when will we hear an echo," and following it is my rejoinder. I'm reprinting them here, as a new post, because of the importance of the issues they bring up.

Anonymous said...
When the pontiff speaks of the "defense of life- from conception to natural end- wherever it is threatened, violated or trampled"...he must also be meant to mean not only abortion...but issues such as Catholic social teachings and Catholic just war doctrine. Certainly if Villaraigossa can be accused by you of attacking life via his pro choice stance......certainly there are many other politicians/public officials on the right and left that are attacking life via support for unjust wars and complete disregard for Catholic social teachings. How is it we never hear of those?......."conception to natural end" would seem to broaden the spectrum as to what could be considered an attack on life....well beyond the abortion issue. But, I suppose the right and the left have their platitudes they must hit...right? How about focusing a little more on charity, compassion etc. instead of just hurling negativity and hatred...which surely isn't keeping with the teachings of Christ. Meanwhile, I'll make sure not to immerse myself in LA's waters for fear they may be contaminated with traces of birth control pills,....you on the otherhand...keep fightin' them windmills.

12:18 PM


Quintero said...
Dear Anonymous, It is a false and vile charge to say that asking a Catholic politician to stop backing the dismemberment of MILLIONS of BABIES, and begging his bishop to admonish him, is not focusing on "compassion and charity" and is "hurling negativity and hatred."

Letting politicians off the hook to continue supporting the killings of MILLIONS of BABIES, as you do, is NOT focusing on "compassion and charity." And making false charges against people who speak in defense of the helpless babies surely IS "hurling negativity and hatred."

This Holy Father and his predecessors of happy memory naturally decry all attacks on human life. Just as naturally, they also apply the Catholic principle of proportionality to those attacks.

Our U.S. bishops (even the late Cardinal Bernardin) have said that aborting tiny, helpless infants is the PRIMARY human rights and social justice priority. In their pro-life statements, our bishops even say that politicians who claim to be in line with the Church on social justice issues but are for aborting babies cast doubt on their own sincerity about the other issues.

Being anti-abortion is not a matter of "left and right." Catholics who support pro-abortion politicians always make lying charges against pro-lifers, claiming falsely that pro-lifers are automatically for war and the death penalty and are against social spending.

And no, saving God's precious preborn babies and helping their moms is NOT "tilting at windmills"; it is stopping along the road to Jericho and helping the helpless whom the priests ignored and would not help.

9:10 PM

Pope speaks; when will we hear an echo?

Have you heard what our Supreme Pontiff, Benedict XVI, said last week? He told an Italian group, the Christian Associations of Catholic Workers, that "the PRIMARY duty" of people in public life is "the defense of life -- from conception to natural end -- WHEREVER it is threatened, violated or trampled." (my emphases)

Okay. Antonio Villaraigosa is in public life. Yet he's not only not defending life, he's attacking it; he's pro-abortion and proud of it. Same with so many other Catholic politicians in Southern California.

So: Has Cardinal Mahony echoed the Pope's words to these poltroons? Has he told them that they are shirking their PRIMARY duty? Not in public, at least. Maybe he has laryngitis. In that case he should seek the intercession of St. Blaise on his feast day, Friday, February 3, as should we all. San Blas, ruega por nosotros!

Cardinal Mahony certainly did not have laryngitis a few years ago when he called abortions "the pre-eminent moral and civil rights issue of our generation." Nor did he have laryngitis when, as Bishop of Stockton in 1984, he wrote a pastoral letter in which he compared pro-abortion politicians to Nazis.

So why has the Cardinal for many years been palling around with politicians of the kind he once likened to Nazis? If he is trying private persuasion on them, it is not working. 300,000 babies -- BABIES! -- are aborted every year in our state, and our tax dollars pay the abortionists for the killings of 100,000 of those infants each year.

The Pope says it is politicians' primary duty to defend life. How much a duty it is, then, for a cardinal to repeat those words to the politicians he knows!

Let us all keep praying and asking God for the light and the strength to fulfill the duties He gives each of us in our state in life. Amen!

Another argument against immersion-baptism

Here's an update on that January 30 LA Times story on traces of prescription drugs, including the birth control Pill, showing up in the Southland's reclaimed water.

In a letter to the Times today, February 1, Steve Oppenheimer, the director of the Cal State Northridge Center for Cancer and Developmental Biology, writes, "The National Research Council, in a 1998 study, indicated that reclaimed water is unsafe for drinking because the technology does not exist to test for thousands of potential toxins and carcinogens that can survive the reclamation process."

Gulp! (So to speak.) Do you suppose any of this birth control Pill-laced water is showing up in the Cardinal Mahony-dictated, Protestant-style immersion-baptism fonts that are now in so many of our churches?