What a nice way to wind down from the first full day of Memorial Day weekend. Are our troops terrific, or what?
The music will blow your mind. I always thought Gene Simmons & the band "KISS" were a bunch of strange people, but it seems I have been wrong on this issue. This was filmed in Iraq at a USO tour of a US Marine Base.
.http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=5MtdIO23MKM
(Thanks Thomas F. Brown III)
Monday, May 30, 2011
Friday, May 27, 2011
VOTF Fan/Obama Advisor Invited to USF
The 2011 Summer scholar-in residence at the (Jesuit) University of San Francisco’s Lane Center for Catholic Studies and Social Thought will be Professor Mary Jo Bane.Professor Bane currently serves as the Thornton Bradshaw Professor of Public Policy and Management and Academic Dean at Harvard Kennedy School. From 1993 to 1996 she served the Clinton administration, under Donna Shalala, as Assistant Secretary for Children and Families at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. From 1992 to 1993, under then-Governor Mario Cuomo, she served as Commissioner of the New York State Department of Social Services, where she previously served as Executive Deputy Commissioner from 1984 to 1986 (also under Cuomo). In April, 2008, then-Senator Barack Obama named Professor Bane as one of his “Catholic Advisors.”
The theme of Professor Bane’s lecture series is “Economic Justice for All? Catholic Social Teaching and American Policy 25 Years Later.” The series consists of three lectures: “The Context: Poverty, inequality and Catholic Social Teaching in the 21st Century on July 6; Policy and Politics Then and Now, on July 13; and The Role of the Church, of Catholic Parishes and of Catholic Universities on July 20.
The first two lectures would seem to be within Professor Bane’s field of expertise, but the third should give faithful Catholics cause for concern. In 2002-2004 Professor Bane played a significant role with the Boston area “Voice of the Faithful.” Respected Boston-based Catholic blogger Domenico Bettinelli wrote at the time “Bane is a vocal leader of Voice of the Faithful” and noted that VOTF’s sister organization, the “Boston Priests Forum” turned to Professor Bane to draft their mission statement.
“Voice of the Faithful” was developed as a response to ecclesiastical mishandling of the sexual abuse crisis, but it quickly became apparent that certain members of the group were at least equally interested in radical alteration of Church structures. One of the early observers of the Boston area VOTF was Boston attorney David Zizik. On August 9, 2003, Mr. Zizik wrote in the National Catholic Reporter:
“I have felt unsettled about Voice of the Faithful since I attended its inaugural convention in Boston on July 20, 2002. Like so many, I had hoped the group would be a harbinger of unity and renewed understanding in a church badly shaken by scandal and division. I was wrong … Voice of the Faithful's Web site says: ‘VOTF does not seek any change in church doctrine.’ This is clearly not so. The group has taken an unrepentantly adversarial posture toward bishops in particular and ecclesial authority in general. It neither recognizes nor respects the authority of bishops to govern dioceses. Voice of the Faithful certainly does want to change church doctrine. In fact, the group's existence is predicated upon a view of ecclesial authority and lay-episcopal relations that rubs against the grain of Catholic doctrine and tradition. To suggest that the group is not after fundamental doctrinal changes reflects a misunderstanding of the meaning of "doctrine," a desire to spread falsehoods about the content of the Catholic faith, or both.”
USF’s Lane Center has a history as a welcoming institute for VOTF. On June 13, 2008, defying an Archdiocesan-wide ban on his presence by Archbishop George Niederauer (a ban shared by Bishop Tod Brown and Cardinal Roger Mahoney), the Lane Center hosted a VOTF-sponsored lecture by retired Australian Bishop Geoffrey Robinson. Bishop Robinson’s subject was on "Confronting Power and Sex in the Catholic Church: Reclaiming the Spirit of Jesus."
Previous summer scholars-in-residence at USF include Jesuit Fathers Thomas Reese (who spoke at the VOTF 2009 national conference), and James F. Keenan, best known for his testimony before the Massachusetts legislature in 2003, where he opposed the Church’s position on same-sex “marriage.”
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
Rotten Dutch Salesian Says: Read Foucault
The Salesians have acted quickly to remove the Dutch "Father B," who was sitting on the board of "Martijn," the Dutch version of NAMBLA, from any ministry and have relieved the Dutch Salesian Superior Fr. Herman Spronck. That's good, but extremely serious questions remain. Our first post on this was back on May 21.
Catholic News Service reports:
"The Salesian headquarters in Rome said a Dutch priest identified only as Father "B" and the superior of the Salesians in the Netherlands, Father Herman Spronck, had both been suspended.
'The Belgium-Holland Province officially announced that Father B no longer has permission to carry out any pastoral activity and that Father Spronck has been relieved of his office as delegate,' the congregation said in a May 23 press release."
In the nauseating interview Spronck gave to RTL Radio, he was quoted:
"We shouldn't consider age so rigidly. You should never break into the personal space of a child if the child does not want that, but that has to do with the child himself. There are also children who themselves indicate that it is okay. Sexual contact is then also possible."
A Microsoft web translation of the interview is here.
In the same interview, Spronck advised the interviewer to consult the works of the French author Michel Foucault. When I saw that, I could not believe my eyes. Foucault, unfortunately considered to be one of the more influential thinkers of the 2oth century, was an open homosexual. He was also a frequenter of the s/m leather bars and bathhouses in San Francisco, before his death from AIDS in 1984. That a Catholic priest would recommend the work of Foucault to anyone as an authority on matters of sexuality is just unbelievable.
Catholic News Service reported that the provincial of Belgium-Holland said, "'We distance ourselves completely from the comments by Father H. Spronck' and the order suspended him 'from all delegated authority' within the Salesian order."
Yes, but how did he get there in the first place?
Mary Help of Christians, pray for us!
Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney
Catholic News Service reports:
"The Salesian headquarters in Rome said a Dutch priest identified only as Father "B" and the superior of the Salesians in the Netherlands, Father Herman Spronck, had both been suspended.
'The Belgium-Holland Province officially announced that Father B no longer has permission to carry out any pastoral activity and that Father Spronck has been relieved of his office as delegate,' the congregation said in a May 23 press release."
In the nauseating interview Spronck gave to RTL Radio, he was quoted:
"We shouldn't consider age so rigidly. You should never break into the personal space of a child if the child does not want that, but that has to do with the child himself. There are also children who themselves indicate that it is okay. Sexual contact is then also possible."
A Microsoft web translation of the interview is here.
In the same interview, Spronck advised the interviewer to consult the works of the French author Michel Foucault. When I saw that, I could not believe my eyes. Foucault, unfortunately considered to be one of the more influential thinkers of the 2oth century, was an open homosexual. He was also a frequenter of the s/m leather bars and bathhouses in San Francisco, before his death from AIDS in 1984. That a Catholic priest would recommend the work of Foucault to anyone as an authority on matters of sexuality is just unbelievable.
Catholic News Service reported that the provincial of Belgium-Holland said, "'We distance ourselves completely from the comments by Father H. Spronck' and the order suspended him 'from all delegated authority' within the Salesian order."
Yes, but how did he get there in the first place?
Mary Help of Christians, pray for us!
Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney
The Feast of Mary Help of Christians
This devotion to the patroness of the Salesians of Don Bosco is more than ever needed as the West faces the same problems that were conquered in the Battle of Lepanto that ended the Ottomen threat to Europe. The Battle of Lepanto took place on 7 October 1571 when a fleet of the Holy League, a coalition of Catholic maritime states, decisively defeated Muslim inaders.
Thanks to Gbbon Cooney for this excerpt from the Wikipedia entry:
Mary Help of Christians (Latin: Sancta Maria Auxilium Christianorum), is a Roman Catholic devotion created to the Virgin Mary. John Chrysostom was the first person to use this title in 345. The devotion became popular in Europe during the pontificate of Pope Pius V and the fights against the Ottoman Empire.
It was definitely established due to the great appreciation of Don Bosco for this Marian title and the development of the Salesian works in several countries since the second half of the 19th century. Although it is commonly associated to the Roman Catholic Church, the Orthodox Church knows also the devotion since 1030 in Ukraine, when the country was defended from a barbarian invasion.
The title of Mary Help of Christians is associated to the defense of the Christian Europe (Latin and Greek), the north of Africa and the Middle East from non-Christian peoples during the Middle Age. In 1572 the Islamic Ottoman Empire intended to invade the Christian Europe. Pope Pius V called Christian armies from all over Europe to defend the continent and asked the believers to pray to Mary in order to help the Christians. The defeat of the Muslim Turks was attributed to the intercession of Mary under such title.
Thanks to Gbbon Cooney for this excerpt from the Wikipedia entry:
Mary Help of Christians (Latin: Sancta Maria Auxilium Christianorum), is a Roman Catholic devotion created to the Virgin Mary. John Chrysostom was the first person to use this title in 345. The devotion became popular in Europe during the pontificate of Pope Pius V and the fights against the Ottoman Empire.
It was definitely established due to the great appreciation of Don Bosco for this Marian title and the development of the Salesian works in several countries since the second half of the 19th century. Although it is commonly associated to the Roman Catholic Church, the Orthodox Church knows also the devotion since 1030 in Ukraine, when the country was defended from a barbarian invasion.
The title of Mary Help of Christians is associated to the defense of the Christian Europe (Latin and Greek), the north of Africa and the Middle East from non-Christian peoples during the Middle Age. In 1572 the Islamic Ottoman Empire intended to invade the Christian Europe. Pope Pius V called Christian armies from all over Europe to defend the continent and asked the believers to pray to Mary in order to help the Christians. The defeat of the Muslim Turks was attributed to the intercession of Mary under such title.
Sunday, May 22, 2011
Minnesotans Will Have Right to Defend Marriage
The Minnesota legislature has decided to allow the citizens of the state to have their say on whether or not the reality of marriage--a union of one man and one woman--shall be enshrined in the state's constitution. A remarkable number of legislators, almost all Democrats, voted to deny the people of the state their right to even vote on the issue.
Given a recent poll which claim the majority of Americans support counterfeit "marriage," one would think counterfeit marriage activists would welcome having the issue on the ballot. But apparently not!
But as we have noted before, when the defense of marriage is on the ballot, support turns out to be stronger than pre-election polls indicate. That's because of the foolish attempt by counterfeit marriage activists to portray those who defend marriage as bigots, and to punish those who publicly support natural marriage. See here, here, here, and here. Those methods don't work in the privacy of the voting booth.
Given a recent poll which claim the majority of Americans support counterfeit "marriage," one would think counterfeit marriage activists would welcome having the issue on the ballot. But apparently not!
But as we have noted before, when the defense of marriage is on the ballot, support turns out to be stronger than pre-election polls indicate. That's because of the foolish attempt by counterfeit marriage activists to portray those who defend marriage as bigots, and to punish those who publicly support natural marriage. See here, here, here, and here. Those methods don't work in the privacy of the voting booth.
Saturday, May 21, 2011
Sickening. A Disgrace to the Salesians.
Even after the horrible revelations of the past decade, this seems beyond belief.
The Associated Press is reporting that a Dutch Salesian Priest sits on the board of a group that actually promotes and endorses pedophila. They refer to him as "Father Van B" and he has a long and rotten history.
"The order's top official in the Netherlands, Delegate Herman Spronck, confirmed in a statement that the priest — identified by RTL Nieuws as 73-year-old "Father Van B." — served on the board of "Martijn," a group that campaigns to end the Dutch ban on adult-child sex."
But if the AP is accurate Spronck is rotten, too. According to the article, Spronck himself has said in an interview that sex between children and adults is not always harmful. Absolutely nauseating. The AP says:
"Superior Jos Claes told Belgian television on Saturday he 'couldn't imagine' that both men would not be disciplined, but said he must make sure of the facts first."
Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney
The Associated Press is reporting that a Dutch Salesian Priest sits on the board of a group that actually promotes and endorses pedophila. They refer to him as "Father Van B" and he has a long and rotten history.
"The order's top official in the Netherlands, Delegate Herman Spronck, confirmed in a statement that the priest — identified by RTL Nieuws as 73-year-old "Father Van B." — served on the board of "Martijn," a group that campaigns to end the Dutch ban on adult-child sex."
But if the AP is accurate Spronck is rotten, too. According to the article, Spronck himself has said in an interview that sex between children and adults is not always harmful. Absolutely nauseating. The AP says:
"Superior Jos Claes told Belgian television on Saturday he 'couldn't imagine' that both men would not be disciplined, but said he must make sure of the facts first."
Disciplined? If true, they should be kicked out right away!
"Dutch Catholic Church spokesman Pieter Kohnen said Saturday that, even with sex abuse scandals rocking the church worldwide, this particular case was 'unbelievable' and the church utterly rejects pedophilia. He said if Superior Claes did not act quickly to reform the Dutch Salesian order's leadership, the matter would be referred to Rome."Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney
Friday, May 20, 2011
October 15 Rosary Rally!
Fr. Peyton's Rosary Crusade , with its trip to San Francisco, presented for us a Catholic City, which drew one of the largest crowds of worshippers to ever assemble in our land. What a contrast with the present state of affairs, where religion and the purity of the Mother of God is derided.
May Governor Pat Brown of 1961, present at the Rosary Crusade, touch the heart of his son Jerry Brown now governor, so that he mighty return to the faith he once so proudly professed.
I was a priest of eleven years when the governor and civic leaders gathered with the clergy, religious and more than half a million believers in the intercessory power of the Mother of God.
We desperately need another crusade: Our October rally will publicly honor the Queen of Peace -- a peace we so urgently seek.
Fr. Peyton's crusades were gigantic. I remember well the tens of thousands of devotees who also left an indelible mark on Los Angeles.
Now once again our Catholics have a wonderful opportunity to publicly honor the Mother God and seek redress for the sins of our City and State. Mark your calendar and plan to attend on October 15.
May Governor Pat Brown of 1961, present at the Rosary Crusade, touch the heart of his son Jerry Brown now governor, so that he mighty return to the faith he once so proudly professed.
I was a priest of eleven years when the governor and civic leaders gathered with the clergy, religious and more than half a million believers in the intercessory power of the Mother of God.
We desperately need another crusade: Our October rally will publicly honor the Queen of Peace -- a peace we so urgently seek.
Fr. Peyton's crusades were gigantic. I remember well the tens of thousands of devotees who also left an indelible mark on Los Angeles.
Now once again our Catholics have a wonderful opportunity to publicly honor the Mother God and seek redress for the sins of our City and State. Mark your calendar and plan to attend on October 15.
Thursday, May 19, 2011
World's Greatest Boxer Stands up for Life!
Way to go, Manny!
Manila, Philippines, May 19, 2011 / 05:57 am (CNA).- Champion boxer Manny Pacquiao has sided with the Philippines’ Catholic bishops in a continuing controversy over a reproductive health bill that would fund access to free contraceptives.
Pacquiao said he would never have been born or become an international boxing champion if his poor, unemployed parents practiced birth control.
“God said go forth and multiply. He did not say go and have just one or two children,” the boxer said after a May 17 meeting with officials of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines.
Manila, Philippines, May 19, 2011 / 05:57 am (CNA).- Champion boxer Manny Pacquiao has sided with the Philippines’ Catholic bishops in a continuing controversy over a reproductive health bill that would fund access to free contraceptives.
Pacquiao said he would never have been born or become an international boxing champion if his poor, unemployed parents practiced birth control.
“God said go forth and multiply. He did not say go and have just one or two children,” the boxer said after a May 17 meeting with officials of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines.
Saturday, May 14, 2011
"Clashes between Jews and Nazis Leave Six Million Dead"
That's Lawrence Auster's headline nailing the disgusting "even-handed" approach by some in the media to the pogrom against Christians in Egypt.
Mr. Auster links to a powerful article by National Review's Andy McCarthy:
"Screaming 'With our blood and soul, we will defend you, Islam,' jihadists stormed the Virgin Mary Church in northwest Cairo last weekend. They torched the Coptic Christian house of worship, burned the nearby homes of two Copt families to the ground, attacked a residential complex, killed a dozen people, and wounded more than 200: just another day in this spontaneous democratic uprising by Muslim hearts yearning for freedom.
In the delusional vocabulary of the 'Arab Spring,' this particular episode is known as a sectarian 'clash.' That was the Washington Post’s take. Its headline reads '12 dead in Egypt as Christians and Muslims clash'—in the same way, one supposes, that a mugger’s fist can be said to 'clash' with his victim’s face. The story goes on, in nauseating 'cycle of violence' style, to describe 'clashes between Muslims and Coptic Christians' that 'left' 12 dead, dozens more wounded, 'and a church charred'—as if it were not crystal clear who were the clashers and who were the clashees, as if the church were somehow combusted into a flaming heap without some readily identifiable actors having done the charring.… "
Mr. Auster links to a powerful article by National Review's Andy McCarthy:
"Screaming 'With our blood and soul, we will defend you, Islam,' jihadists stormed the Virgin Mary Church in northwest Cairo last weekend. They torched the Coptic Christian house of worship, burned the nearby homes of two Copt families to the ground, attacked a residential complex, killed a dozen people, and wounded more than 200: just another day in this spontaneous democratic uprising by Muslim hearts yearning for freedom.
In the delusional vocabulary of the 'Arab Spring,' this particular episode is known as a sectarian 'clash.' That was the Washington Post’s take. Its headline reads '12 dead in Egypt as Christians and Muslims clash'—in the same way, one supposes, that a mugger’s fist can be said to 'clash' with his victim’s face. The story goes on, in nauseating 'cycle of violence' style, to describe 'clashes between Muslims and Coptic Christians' that 'left' 12 dead, dozens more wounded, 'and a church charred'—as if it were not crystal clear who were the clashers and who were the clashees, as if the church were somehow combusted into a flaming heap without some readily identifiable actors having done the charring.… "
Friday, May 13, 2011
Family Rosary Rally in SF October 15!
Wonderful news--the Legion of Mary will host the Family Rosary Crusade 2011 on October 15 in San Francisco's Civic Center. From yesterday's California Catholic Daily:
With the archbishop’s blessings
Family Rosary Crusade planned at San Francisco Civic Center in October
On Oct. 15, 2011, in the heart of San Francisco, the Legion of Mary of the Archdiocese of San Francisco will host the Family Rosary Crusade. The Rosary Crusade will be held in the Civic Center Plaza at noon.
The Family Rosary Crusade commemorates the 50th Anniversary of Fr. Patrick Peyton’s October 1961 Rosary Rally, which drew more than 550,000 people to the Polo Fields in San Francisco’s Golden Gate Park. Fr. Peyton died in 1992 at the age of 83.
The Legion of Mary asked for and received the blessing of San Francisco Archbishop George Niederauer for the event. Organizers have invited the archbishop to give the invocation, and bishops Salvatore Cordileone of Oakland and Robert Vasa of Santa Rosa have both promised to attend.
The day will begin with the Procession of the Blessed Sacrament from one of the local churches, and Fr. Andrew Apostoli, EWTN host and co-founder of the Community of the Franciscan Friars of the Renewal, will be the keynote speaker.
“Each year the Legion of Mary tries to contribute one significant event to the archdiocese,” David Marten, president of the Legion’s Board for the Archdiocese of San Francisco, told California Catholic Daily. “In 2009, the ‘Year of St Paul,’ our guest was author and pilgrimage leader Steve Ray. He shared his first-hand knowledge of the Middle East, and St. Paul’s actual routes and activities in a discussion at St. Paul’s Church, which was attended by people from all over the archdiocese, including Bishop William Justice.”
“In 2010, the ‘Year of the Priest,’ we hosted theologian and retreat master Fr. Frederick Miller, STD,” Marten continued. “Fr. Miller spoke on ‘true devotion,’ as exemplified by such priests as Fr. Louis de Montfort and the Cure of Ars. He met with our spiritual directors, and also spoke before a group of about 300 Legionaries. This year, our object is to foster devotion to the Blessed Mother and to Jesus Christ. We hope we can accomplish this by witnessing in a very public place. We are using the same format as Fr. Peyton did in 1961 -- we even tried to get the Polo Fields! Unfortunately, it was not available but we are happy with the Civic Center. It’s a lot more centrally located and they did not have BART in those days!”
Fr. Lawrence Goode, the Legion’s spiritual director, also said he sees the Rosary Crusade as an important public expression of faith. Fr. Goode shared fond memories of Fr. Peyton and remembered the 1961 rally. “In those days, we went door-to-door inviting people to attend the rally,” he said. “Fr. Peyton was an amazing priest, a friend of movie stars and celebrities, yet he always remained very simple. Once I met him at Our Lady of Peace parish, where he had come to dedicate a statue. He began by apologizing that there was something wrong with his throat -- and then he spoke for half an hour!”
While the October event honors and remembers the work of Fr. Peyton, Fr. Goode stressed that the 2011 Rosary Crusade is anything but an exercise in nostalgia. “You know, it was Fr. Peyton who popularized the phrase ‘the family that prays together stays together,’” said Fr. Goode. “His idea is even more relevant today than it was then. We must pray for the strengthening of family life.”
The Legion of Mary was founded by Frank Duff in Dublin, Ireland, in 1921. The Legion’s priority is the spiritual and social welfare of each person. Legionaries gather for prayer, and work together in furtherance of parish goals. It is the largest apostolic organization of lay people in the Catholic Church, with well over 3 million active members in almost every country of the world.
For more information about the Family Rosary Crusade, go here.
And check out this absolutely amazing video of Fr. Peyton’s 1961 San Francisco Rosary Rally:
With the archbishop’s blessings
Family Rosary Crusade planned at San Francisco Civic Center in October
On Oct. 15, 2011, in the heart of San Francisco, the Legion of Mary of the Archdiocese of San Francisco will host the Family Rosary Crusade. The Rosary Crusade will be held in the Civic Center Plaza at noon.
The Family Rosary Crusade commemorates the 50th Anniversary of Fr. Patrick Peyton’s October 1961 Rosary Rally, which drew more than 550,000 people to the Polo Fields in San Francisco’s Golden Gate Park. Fr. Peyton died in 1992 at the age of 83.
The Legion of Mary asked for and received the blessing of San Francisco Archbishop George Niederauer for the event. Organizers have invited the archbishop to give the invocation, and bishops Salvatore Cordileone of Oakland and Robert Vasa of Santa Rosa have both promised to attend.
The day will begin with the Procession of the Blessed Sacrament from one of the local churches, and Fr. Andrew Apostoli, EWTN host and co-founder of the Community of the Franciscan Friars of the Renewal, will be the keynote speaker.
“Each year the Legion of Mary tries to contribute one significant event to the archdiocese,” David Marten, president of the Legion’s Board for the Archdiocese of San Francisco, told California Catholic Daily. “In 2009, the ‘Year of St Paul,’ our guest was author and pilgrimage leader Steve Ray. He shared his first-hand knowledge of the Middle East, and St. Paul’s actual routes and activities in a discussion at St. Paul’s Church, which was attended by people from all over the archdiocese, including Bishop William Justice.”
“In 2010, the ‘Year of the Priest,’ we hosted theologian and retreat master Fr. Frederick Miller, STD,” Marten continued. “Fr. Miller spoke on ‘true devotion,’ as exemplified by such priests as Fr. Louis de Montfort and the Cure of Ars. He met with our spiritual directors, and also spoke before a group of about 300 Legionaries. This year, our object is to foster devotion to the Blessed Mother and to Jesus Christ. We hope we can accomplish this by witnessing in a very public place. We are using the same format as Fr. Peyton did in 1961 -- we even tried to get the Polo Fields! Unfortunately, it was not available but we are happy with the Civic Center. It’s a lot more centrally located and they did not have BART in those days!”
Fr. Lawrence Goode, the Legion’s spiritual director, also said he sees the Rosary Crusade as an important public expression of faith. Fr. Goode shared fond memories of Fr. Peyton and remembered the 1961 rally. “In those days, we went door-to-door inviting people to attend the rally,” he said. “Fr. Peyton was an amazing priest, a friend of movie stars and celebrities, yet he always remained very simple. Once I met him at Our Lady of Peace parish, where he had come to dedicate a statue. He began by apologizing that there was something wrong with his throat -- and then he spoke for half an hour!”
While the October event honors and remembers the work of Fr. Peyton, Fr. Goode stressed that the 2011 Rosary Crusade is anything but an exercise in nostalgia. “You know, it was Fr. Peyton who popularized the phrase ‘the family that prays together stays together,’” said Fr. Goode. “His idea is even more relevant today than it was then. We must pray for the strengthening of family life.”
The Legion of Mary was founded by Frank Duff in Dublin, Ireland, in 1921. The Legion’s priority is the spiritual and social welfare of each person. Legionaries gather for prayer, and work together in furtherance of parish goals. It is the largest apostolic organization of lay people in the Catholic Church, with well over 3 million active members in almost every country of the world.
For more information about the Family Rosary Crusade, go here.
And check out this absolutely amazing video of Fr. Peyton’s 1961 San Francisco Rosary Rally:
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
Great News: Mitch Daniels Signs Bill Defunding "Murder, Inc"*
From LifeNews:
Indiana Gov. Daniels Signs Bill De-Funding Planned Parenthood
Governor Mitch Daniels of Indiana has signed a bill to revoke taxpayer funding for the Planned Parenthood abortion business. The bill makes the Hoosier state the first to go as far as it has in shutting down funding.
Daniels signed the bill Thursday along with 79 other bills and the abortion business has already responded by saying it has filed a temporary restraining order seeking to prevent the law from being enforced, though one pro-life group has already said the lawsuit will likely fail in court.
* h/t Mark Shea
Indiana Gov. Daniels Signs Bill De-Funding Planned Parenthood
Governor Mitch Daniels of Indiana has signed a bill to revoke taxpayer funding for the Planned Parenthood abortion business. The bill makes the Hoosier state the first to go as far as it has in shutting down funding.
Daniels signed the bill Thursday along with 79 other bills and the abortion business has already responded by saying it has filed a temporary restraining order seeking to prevent the law from being enforced, though one pro-life group has already said the lawsuit will likely fail in court.
* h/t Mark Shea
Nice: Subsidiarity in Action
A very nice post from one of the young writers over at CatholicVote.org about Americans pulling together and taking care of one another in their time of need:
Why have FEMA? Alabama citizens show us spontaneous charity in action
by Joshua Mercer
Natural disasters can literally destroy communities. We’ve seen this from Hurricane Katrina, the earthquake in Japan, the recent tornadoes in the South, and the current flooding of the Mississippi in Memphis. (Pray for my relatives in North Dakota; sandbags are keeping water from flooding their house on all four sides. They have to travel by boat instead of car because of the flooding of the Red River of the North.)
Because there is so much need of shelter, clothing and water for so many displaced families, it is thought that only the federal government can effectively rise to the occasion and meet these needs of all these people.
But Katrina changed all that. It opened our eyes to the incompetence of bureaucracy from the federal level (“Brownie”) down to the municipal level (remember all the school buses that went unused?).
In contrast, Walmart and Home Depot mobilized immediately and performed some amazing acts of corporate citizenship, while FEMA was spinning their wheels:
“Between August 29 [when Katrina made landfall] and September 16,” [Economist Steve Horwitz] reports, “Wal-Mart shipped almost 2,500 truckloads of merchandise to the affected areas and had drivers and trucks in place to ship relief supplies to community members and organizations wishing to help....
Mr. Mercer then switches over to the disastrous tornadoes that afflicetd the south last week:
And it’s not just corporations who have responded to the call.
When tornadoes recently ravaged the city of Tuscaloosa (home of the University of Alabama), they found help from an unlikely source. Their chief rival: fans of Auburn University."
Bless them!
Why have FEMA? Alabama citizens show us spontaneous charity in action
by Joshua Mercer
Natural disasters can literally destroy communities. We’ve seen this from Hurricane Katrina, the earthquake in Japan, the recent tornadoes in the South, and the current flooding of the Mississippi in Memphis. (Pray for my relatives in North Dakota; sandbags are keeping water from flooding their house on all four sides. They have to travel by boat instead of car because of the flooding of the Red River of the North.)
Because there is so much need of shelter, clothing and water for so many displaced families, it is thought that only the federal government can effectively rise to the occasion and meet these needs of all these people.
But Katrina changed all that. It opened our eyes to the incompetence of bureaucracy from the federal level (“Brownie”) down to the municipal level (remember all the school buses that went unused?).
In contrast, Walmart and Home Depot mobilized immediately and performed some amazing acts of corporate citizenship, while FEMA was spinning their wheels:
“Between August 29 [when Katrina made landfall] and September 16,” [Economist Steve Horwitz] reports, “Wal-Mart shipped almost 2,500 truckloads of merchandise to the affected areas and had drivers and trucks in place to ship relief supplies to community members and organizations wishing to help....
Mr. Mercer then switches over to the disastrous tornadoes that afflicetd the south last week:
And it’s not just corporations who have responded to the call.
When tornadoes recently ravaged the city of Tuscaloosa (home of the University of Alabama), they found help from an unlikely source. Their chief rival: fans of Auburn University."
Bless them!
Monday, May 9, 2011
Speaking of Catholic Charities....
California Catholic Daily published an article on May 9 (written by us) on a May 2 column in the National Catholic Reporter by CCCYO Ex-Executive Director Brian Cahill:
"Clumsy, heavy-handed, ineffective”
Former head of San Francisco Catholic Charities blasts faithful bishops, condemns what he calls the ‘Official Church’
On May 2, the National Catholic Reporter published a column by Brian Cahill, ex-executive director of Catholic Charities of San Francisco, titled “Why let bishops drive us from church we love?” In the piece, Cahill excoriated a number of bishops, including two from California.
It was under Mr. Cahill’s leadership that Catholic Charities embarked on the ill-advised “partnership” with Family Builders by Adoption -- “the gayest adoption agency in the country.” That three-year partnership, which came to an end in 2009, united Catholic Charities with an organization that thought it was a good idea to advertise for gay adoptive “dads” on the “leather” and porn” pages of San Francisco’s two homosexual-oriented newspapers. The ad campaign, exposed by CalCatholic, was so outrageous that even the city government of San Francisco realized it had to shut it down.
Mr. Cahill’s column began, “Well-informed U.S. Catholics are acutely aware of the arrogance, paternalism, flawed logic, inflammatory rhetoric, failure of personal accountability, and lack of pastoral sensitivity of many of our church leaders. The U.S. bishops have set the tone with their continued denial of the wholesale rejection of church teaching on contraception; their clumsy, heavy-handed, ineffective attempt to influence national health care legislation; their opposition to U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development regulations prohibiting discrimination against gays and lesbians; and their condemnation of the work of theologian St. Joseph Sr. Elizabeth Johnson without even meeting with her.”
Mr. Cahill then lambasted by name a number of cardinals and bishops, beginning with Cardinal Justin Rigali of Philadelphia, “the latest U.S. poster boy for our church’s continued failure to confront the molestation scandal.” He then turned his pen against two of the finest thinkers in the Church today, Cardinal Raymond Burke and Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver. Cardinal Burke and other unnamed bishops, Cahill said, were “shortsighted” because they favor “the Eucharist as a sanction against public officials.” Archbishop Chaput, said Cahill, “tried to tell us not to vote for presidential candidate Barack Obama.”
Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington got it because, in Cahill’s words, he “referred to a Vatican pronouncement that equated child molestation and women’s ordination as a ‘welcome statement.’" Bishop Thomas Olmsted of Phoenix got the thumbs down from Cahill for “excommunicating a dedicated Mercy nun” just because she facilitated an abortion.
Cahill then criticized Bishop Robert Vasa of Santa Rosa because he “had forced a loyalty oath on all church employees in his former diocese.” Bishop Salvatore Cordileone of Oakland got it because he “trashed President Obama and Gov. Jerry Brown for not defending heterosexual marriage and for ignoring the will of the people.”
Archbishop Timothy Dolan of New York, who leads the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, earned Cahill’s displeasure for his defense of “the Roman church’s” teaching on natural marriage.
Cahill then gave a short list of those bishops who met his standards, or whom he simply knew and liked personally, since they were all from the Archdiocese of San Francisco. He began by lauding Robert McElroy, San Francisco’s newest auxiliary bishop, who sits on the Advisory Board of the University of San Francisco’s notorious Lane Center for Catholic Studies and Social Thought. Bishop McElroy was one of the two moral theologians who gave Catholic Charities, under Cahill’s leadership, the green light to form the partnership with Family Builders by Adoption.
Cahill also gave his OK to ex-Archbishop John Quinn of San Francisco, “who continues his advocacy for the reform of the papacy.” It was Archbishop Quinn who began the slide at San Francisco’s Most Holy Redeemer Church by appointing Fr. Anthony McGuire as pastor in 1982. According to Fr. Donal Godfrey, this was the beginning of the archbishop’s warm relationship with the parish: “In fact Quinn came frequently and loved his visits to MHR.” Mr. Cahill is also a fan of MHR; he was the featured speaker at the church’s 2008 Ash Wednesday vespers service.
Cahill praised Bishop John Wester of Salt Lake City, a former Auxiliary Bishop of San Francisco, “a priest of deep compassion who has led the U.S. bishops in their advocacy for the needs of immigrants,” and current San Francisco Archbishop George Niederauer, “whose first response to an issue is always pastoral.
Cahill’s criterion for good bishop/bad bishop seems selective with regard to Archbishop Niederauer since the archbishop was instrumental in accomplishing the very thing Cahill criticizes Bishop Cordileone for: the defense of natural marriage in California. At the instigation of MHR pastoral council member Matt Dorsey, Archbishop Niederauer received the 2009 “Pink Brick” award by the organizers of the Gay Pride Parade, dishonoring the archbishop for allegedly causing “significant harm to the LGBT community.”
Cahill recently had another column published in Communion, the monthly newsletter of “Catholics for Equality,” in which he supported same-sex “marriage.” Like other Catholics for Equality writers and similar dissidents, Cahill condemns “the official church.” That term seems to be replacing the formerly preferred “institutional church.” The change of wording is significant. Dissidents and pro-homosexual activists no longer object to “the institutional church,” since they have begun to develop institutions of their own. Now the objection is more honest: it is to “the official church,” the Church of Rome, of the popes, and, for orthodox Catholics, of Jesus Himself.
Cahill served as executive director of San Francisco Catholic Charities from 2000-2008. In a March opinion piece published by the San Francisco Chronicle, Cahill revealed that he voted against Proposition 8 and gave $1000 to the unsuccessful campaign to defeat it. Under Cahill’s leadership, Catholic Charities merged with the archdiocese’s Catholic Youth Organization in 2003 to become Catholic Charities CYO, the name it still uses today.
Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney
"Clumsy, heavy-handed, ineffective”
Former head of San Francisco Catholic Charities blasts faithful bishops, condemns what he calls the ‘Official Church’
On May 2, the National Catholic Reporter published a column by Brian Cahill, ex-executive director of Catholic Charities of San Francisco, titled “Why let bishops drive us from church we love?” In the piece, Cahill excoriated a number of bishops, including two from California.
It was under Mr. Cahill’s leadership that Catholic Charities embarked on the ill-advised “partnership” with Family Builders by Adoption -- “the gayest adoption agency in the country.” That three-year partnership, which came to an end in 2009, united Catholic Charities with an organization that thought it was a good idea to advertise for gay adoptive “dads” on the “leather” and porn” pages of San Francisco’s two homosexual-oriented newspapers. The ad campaign, exposed by CalCatholic, was so outrageous that even the city government of San Francisco realized it had to shut it down.
Mr. Cahill’s column began, “Well-informed U.S. Catholics are acutely aware of the arrogance, paternalism, flawed logic, inflammatory rhetoric, failure of personal accountability, and lack of pastoral sensitivity of many of our church leaders. The U.S. bishops have set the tone with their continued denial of the wholesale rejection of church teaching on contraception; their clumsy, heavy-handed, ineffective attempt to influence national health care legislation; their opposition to U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development regulations prohibiting discrimination against gays and lesbians; and their condemnation of the work of theologian St. Joseph Sr. Elizabeth Johnson without even meeting with her.”
Mr. Cahill then lambasted by name a number of cardinals and bishops, beginning with Cardinal Justin Rigali of Philadelphia, “the latest U.S. poster boy for our church’s continued failure to confront the molestation scandal.” He then turned his pen against two of the finest thinkers in the Church today, Cardinal Raymond Burke and Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver. Cardinal Burke and other unnamed bishops, Cahill said, were “shortsighted” because they favor “the Eucharist as a sanction against public officials.” Archbishop Chaput, said Cahill, “tried to tell us not to vote for presidential candidate Barack Obama.”
Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington got it because, in Cahill’s words, he “referred to a Vatican pronouncement that equated child molestation and women’s ordination as a ‘welcome statement.’" Bishop Thomas Olmsted of Phoenix got the thumbs down from Cahill for “excommunicating a dedicated Mercy nun” just because she facilitated an abortion.
Cahill then criticized Bishop Robert Vasa of Santa Rosa because he “had forced a loyalty oath on all church employees in his former diocese.” Bishop Salvatore Cordileone of Oakland got it because he “trashed President Obama and Gov. Jerry Brown for not defending heterosexual marriage and for ignoring the will of the people.”
Archbishop Timothy Dolan of New York, who leads the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, earned Cahill’s displeasure for his defense of “the Roman church’s” teaching on natural marriage.
Cahill then gave a short list of those bishops who met his standards, or whom he simply knew and liked personally, since they were all from the Archdiocese of San Francisco. He began by lauding Robert McElroy, San Francisco’s newest auxiliary bishop, who sits on the Advisory Board of the University of San Francisco’s notorious Lane Center for Catholic Studies and Social Thought. Bishop McElroy was one of the two moral theologians who gave Catholic Charities, under Cahill’s leadership, the green light to form the partnership with Family Builders by Adoption.
Cahill also gave his OK to ex-Archbishop John Quinn of San Francisco, “who continues his advocacy for the reform of the papacy.” It was Archbishop Quinn who began the slide at San Francisco’s Most Holy Redeemer Church by appointing Fr. Anthony McGuire as pastor in 1982. According to Fr. Donal Godfrey, this was the beginning of the archbishop’s warm relationship with the parish: “In fact Quinn came frequently and loved his visits to MHR.” Mr. Cahill is also a fan of MHR; he was the featured speaker at the church’s 2008 Ash Wednesday vespers service.
Cahill praised Bishop John Wester of Salt Lake City, a former Auxiliary Bishop of San Francisco, “a priest of deep compassion who has led the U.S. bishops in their advocacy for the needs of immigrants,” and current San Francisco Archbishop George Niederauer, “whose first response to an issue is always pastoral.
Cahill’s criterion for good bishop/bad bishop seems selective with regard to Archbishop Niederauer since the archbishop was instrumental in accomplishing the very thing Cahill criticizes Bishop Cordileone for: the defense of natural marriage in California. At the instigation of MHR pastoral council member Matt Dorsey, Archbishop Niederauer received the 2009 “Pink Brick” award by the organizers of the Gay Pride Parade, dishonoring the archbishop for allegedly causing “significant harm to the LGBT community.”
Cahill recently had another column published in Communion, the monthly newsletter of “Catholics for Equality,” in which he supported same-sex “marriage.” Like other Catholics for Equality writers and similar dissidents, Cahill condemns “the official church.” That term seems to be replacing the formerly preferred “institutional church.” The change of wording is significant. Dissidents and pro-homosexual activists no longer object to “the institutional church,” since they have begun to develop institutions of their own. Now the objection is more honest: it is to “the official church,” the Church of Rome, of the popes, and, for orthodox Catholics, of Jesus Himself.
Cahill served as executive director of San Francisco Catholic Charities from 2000-2008. In a March opinion piece published by the San Francisco Chronicle, Cahill revealed that he voted against Proposition 8 and gave $1000 to the unsuccessful campaign to defeat it. Under Cahill’s leadership, Catholic Charities merged with the archdiocese’s Catholic Youth Organization in 2003 to become Catholic Charities CYO, the name it still uses today.
Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney
Monsignor Vincent Foy on "The Betrayal of Homosexuals"
Monsignor Vincent Foy has a moving article, published in LifeSiteNews on the betrayal of same-sex attracted persons by the culture and, more troubling, by persons within the church:
"Among the evil fruits of this decadent age there is an unparalleled betrayal of homosexuals. That evil fruit we consider here briefly, emphasizing the betrayal as the rejection of justice and charity towards a significant number of God’s sons and daughters."
Read the whole thing.
Monsignor Foy makes the same point we were attempting to make in an article on the Catholic Charities adoptions fiasco in California Catholic Daily back on April 8, 2008--that the Archdiocese of San Francisco was betraying both same-sex attracted persons and it's duty to those persons:
"Those supporters of the new adoptions policy said over and over again that their concern was the good of the children. But from a Catholic point of view, that’s insufficient. What wasn’t considered was the good of the homosexual/transgender adoptive persons. And from God’s point of view, they are every bit as important as the children. The Vatican said that allowing children to be adopted by homosexual persons amounted to “doing violence to the children.” But what was never said is that allowing adoptions by homosexual/transgender persons does violence to those persons. No adoption agency would give a child to a person they considered unfit. CCCYO allowed homosexual persons to adopt until the Vatican ordered it stopped, and it now staffs an agency that specifically targets homosexual/transgender adopters. CCCYO thus implicitly asserts that it’s OK to live a homosexual/transgendered lifestyle.
But since homosexual behavior is sinful, and sin alienates one from God, the Church must never say that it is OK. By doing so, they are abandoning the homosexual/transgender persons.
In approving this compromise, the archdiocese is saying to them: 'We don’t care about you, except insofar as you can provide a materially decent environment to this child.' The archdiocese thus violates one of the most basic precepts of Catholic moral philosophy: they are treating persons as means rather than ends. The homosexual (and now transgender) adoptive parents are treated as just that, as parents, as functions, rather than as persons, as souls infinitely precious to God. As souls, as persons, they are considered expendable. But no human being is not a person, and no person is expendable. Not gay people, not 'transgendered' people. No one."
"Among the evil fruits of this decadent age there is an unparalleled betrayal of homosexuals. That evil fruit we consider here briefly, emphasizing the betrayal as the rejection of justice and charity towards a significant number of God’s sons and daughters."
The Monsignor makes it crystal clear that our duty is love, not tolerance:
"The words of Christ 'Love your neighbor as yourself' apply to all in their attitude towards homosexuals. Like all, they are called to chastity and holiness and we owe our cooperation in this magnificent vocation. It has been said that the only real tragedy in life is not to become a saint. Certainly the only true tragedy is not to die in God’s love and grace."Read the whole thing.
Monsignor Foy makes the same point we were attempting to make in an article on the Catholic Charities adoptions fiasco in California Catholic Daily back on April 8, 2008--that the Archdiocese of San Francisco was betraying both same-sex attracted persons and it's duty to those persons:
"Those supporters of the new adoptions policy said over and over again that their concern was the good of the children. But from a Catholic point of view, that’s insufficient. What wasn’t considered was the good of the homosexual/transgender adoptive persons. And from God’s point of view, they are every bit as important as the children. The Vatican said that allowing children to be adopted by homosexual persons amounted to “doing violence to the children.” But what was never said is that allowing adoptions by homosexual/transgender persons does violence to those persons. No adoption agency would give a child to a person they considered unfit. CCCYO allowed homosexual persons to adopt until the Vatican ordered it stopped, and it now staffs an agency that specifically targets homosexual/transgender adopters. CCCYO thus implicitly asserts that it’s OK to live a homosexual/transgendered lifestyle.
But since homosexual behavior is sinful, and sin alienates one from God, the Church must never say that it is OK. By doing so, they are abandoning the homosexual/transgender persons.
In approving this compromise, the archdiocese is saying to them: 'We don’t care about you, except insofar as you can provide a materially decent environment to this child.' The archdiocese thus violates one of the most basic precepts of Catholic moral philosophy: they are treating persons as means rather than ends. The homosexual (and now transgender) adoptive parents are treated as just that, as parents, as functions, rather than as persons, as souls infinitely precious to God. As souls, as persons, they are considered expendable. But no human being is not a person, and no person is expendable. Not gay people, not 'transgendered' people. No one."
Saturday, May 7, 2011
More on Vacating Judge Walker's Ruling
The great Ed Whelan had documented how liberal jurists and reporters have refused to meet the argument for the vacating of Judge Walker's Proposition 8 ruling (see here, here, here, and here), based on the long-term same-sex relationship he is in, and of course was in, at the time of his ruling. The opponents of Prop 8 claim to see this as a motion to vacate based on the fact Walker is same-sex attracted.
Whether Walker's ruling is vacated or not, the refusal is itself telling, and of a piece with the totalitarian structure of homosexual activism. William Duncan of the National Orgainzation for Marriage, also writing in National Review:
"If you want a sense of the degree to which politicians in Sacramento are acting on the principle 'by any means necessary' in their desire to be rid of Proposition 8, the state’s marriage amendment, and their absolute contempt for the people of the state who approved the amendment, you need look no further than the news from yesterday. It reports that California’s new attorney general filed a brief with the California Supreme Court arguing that only public officials can represent the state in defending marriage laws. Conveniently, the attorney general and governor are not willing to defend the marriage law, so if the AG’s proposal is accepted, there would be no defense of Proposition 8.
The real kick in the story is that the brief filed yesterday is an amicus brief — in other words, the AG was not required to weigh in at all, she just chose to express her opinion that the people who put the proposition on the ballot (and convinced a majority of Californians to adopt it) should not get to have a say in its defense. The legislative leadership also jumped in, defeating a bill that would have made clear that initiative sponsors can defend their laws in court, in a committee vote yesterday. So the ruling political class in California is arrayed against a fair hearing for Proposition 8. Let’s hope the California Supreme Court refuses to go along.
With last week’s news about the effort to keep DOMA from getting a lawyer, one could reasonably ask why some influential people believe marriage doesn’t deserve a defense. Maybe they are less sure of their own position than they seem."
Sure. They're "unsure of their position" because it is in opposition to reality. As Eric Voelgelin pointed out years ago, the mark of totalitarian ideology is the unwillingness to discuss, because discussion allows reality to intrude, and the intrusion of reality destroys the dream world.
Whether Walker's ruling is vacated or not, the refusal is itself telling, and of a piece with the totalitarian structure of homosexual activism. William Duncan of the National Orgainzation for Marriage, also writing in National Review:
"If you want a sense of the degree to which politicians in Sacramento are acting on the principle 'by any means necessary' in their desire to be rid of Proposition 8, the state’s marriage amendment, and their absolute contempt for the people of the state who approved the amendment, you need look no further than the news from yesterday. It reports that California’s new attorney general filed a brief with the California Supreme Court arguing that only public officials can represent the state in defending marriage laws. Conveniently, the attorney general and governor are not willing to defend the marriage law, so if the AG’s proposal is accepted, there would be no defense of Proposition 8.
The real kick in the story is that the brief filed yesterday is an amicus brief — in other words, the AG was not required to weigh in at all, she just chose to express her opinion that the people who put the proposition on the ballot (and convinced a majority of Californians to adopt it) should not get to have a say in its defense. The legislative leadership also jumped in, defeating a bill that would have made clear that initiative sponsors can defend their laws in court, in a committee vote yesterday. So the ruling political class in California is arrayed against a fair hearing for Proposition 8. Let’s hope the California Supreme Court refuses to go along.
With last week’s news about the effort to keep DOMA from getting a lawyer, one could reasonably ask why some influential people believe marriage doesn’t deserve a defense. Maybe they are less sure of their own position than they seem."
Sure. They're "unsure of their position" because it is in opposition to reality. As Eric Voelgelin pointed out years ago, the mark of totalitarian ideology is the unwillingness to discuss, because discussion allows reality to intrude, and the intrusion of reality destroys the dream world.
Friday, May 6, 2011
Words of Wisdom
Thomas Jefferson was the third president of the United States, and perhaps the brightest politican we have ever had. He knew because he himself studied the previous failed attempts at government. He understood actual history, the nature of God, his laws and the nature of man. That happens to be way more than what most understand today. Jefferson really knew his stuff. A voice from the past to lead us in the future:
When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, we shall become as corrupt as Europe . Thomas Jefferson
The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not. Thomas Jefferson
It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes. A principle which if acted on would save one-half the wars of the world. Thomas Jefferson
I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them. Thomas Jefferson
My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government. Thomas Jefferson
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. Thomas Jefferson
To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical. Thomas Jefferson
Thomas Jefferson said in 1802: I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property - until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.
When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, we shall become as corrupt as Europe . Thomas Jefferson
The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not. Thomas Jefferson
It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes. A principle which if acted on would save one-half the wars of the world. Thomas Jefferson
I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them. Thomas Jefferson
My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government. Thomas Jefferson
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. Thomas Jefferson
To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical. Thomas Jefferson
Thomas Jefferson said in 1802: I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property - until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.
Monday, May 2, 2011
Celebrating Holy Thursday at USF: "Freedom, Gender, and Sexuality Seder"
Another entry for our "Contributions of the LGBT Movement to American Society" series.
Social Justice Passover Seder: Freedom, Gender, and Sexuality
April 21, 6PM, USF Main Campus, Fromm Hall, Maraschi Room
The third annual Social Justice Passover Seder of the USF JSSJ Program will be led by long-time social justive activist Rabbi Camille Shira Angel, the spiritual leader of Congregation Sha'ar Zahav, a progressive Reform synagogue comprised of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and heterosexual Jews and non-Jews. Light Pesadic snacks will be served.
From Sha'ar Zahav's "About Us" page:
"We are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and heterosexual Jews, together with partners, family and friends, both Jewish and non-Jewish. We come from a wide range of religious, ethnic, class and cultural backgrounds to worship God with egalitarian, feminist and gay-positive Jewish liturgy."
As Michael Medved commented in the "Why are Jews Liberal?" symposium:
"Why and how? In 3,000 years of well-documented tradition prior to, say, 1970, there was not the slightest hint of any sort of endorsement of homosexual coupling."
I guess they know better up at USF...
Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney
Social Justice Passover Seder: Freedom, Gender, and Sexuality
April 21, 6PM, USF Main Campus, Fromm Hall, Maraschi Room
The third annual Social Justice Passover Seder of the USF JSSJ Program will be led by long-time social justive activist Rabbi Camille Shira Angel, the spiritual leader of Congregation Sha'ar Zahav, a progressive Reform synagogue comprised of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and heterosexual Jews and non-Jews. Light Pesadic snacks will be served.
From Sha'ar Zahav's "About Us" page:
"We are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and heterosexual Jews, together with partners, family and friends, both Jewish and non-Jewish. We come from a wide range of religious, ethnic, class and cultural backgrounds to worship God with egalitarian, feminist and gay-positive Jewish liturgy."
As Michael Medved commented in the "Why are Jews Liberal?" symposium:
"Why and how? In 3,000 years of well-documented tradition prior to, say, 1970, there was not the slightest hint of any sort of endorsement of homosexual coupling."
I guess they know better up at USF...
Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney
Supreme Court Declines to Hear "Catholic League v. San Francisco"
Today the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the appeal of Catholic League v. San Francisco, the suit brought by two San Francisco Catholics against the city of San Francisco. The suit was brought in reponse to the Board of Supervisors March, 2006 issuing of Resolution 168-06, which can be read here.
When the Supreme Court refuses to hear a case, they generally don't say why, nor did they in this case. Although the Supremes denied a hearing, the case did inspire powerful arguments, which still stand:
Judge Kleinfeld, among the dissenters in the Ninth Circuit appeal:
"The 'message' in the resolution, unlike, say, the message that might be inferred from some symbolic display, is explicit: a Catholic doctrine duly communicated by the part of the Catholic church in charge of clarifying doctrine is 'hateful,' 'defamatory,' 'insulting,' 'callous,' and 'discriminatory,' 'showing 'insensitivity and ignorance,' the Catholic Church is a hateful foreign meddler in San Francisco’s affairs, the Catholic Church ought to 'withdraw' its religious directive, and the local archbishop should defy his superior’s directive. This is indeed a 'message of . . . disapproval.' And that is all it takes for it to be unconstitutional.”
Professor Jonathon Turley, who objected to the resolution even though he personally agreed with the city's position:
"The resolution has the Board directly calling on Catholic leaders to defy the Cardinal and directly objects to the Vatican policy. That would seem to take an 'official position on religious doctrine.' I would be less concerned if the resolution solely addressed the Cardinals statement as hateful rhetoric as opposed to an official rejection of the religious based policy....
There is a good-faith debate as to whether such anti-discrimination laws violate the religion clauses. I would not criticize leaders participating in such a debate. However, the resolution in this case calls for defiance of the Cardinal and the removal of the policy."
Good Jesuit Fr. James Schall, of Georgetown, who gets right down to the nub:
"Children need a parent of each sex, whether they be 'in need' or not. Compassion does not trump principle. The Board obscures what human life and nature are about. It does this by the suasive power of civil resolution. In the end, it is not the Board that is protecting the needs and nature of real children, but the hapless Vatican.
In San Francisco, such a voice perhaps cries in the wilderness, but it cries the truth about children and their needs. It puts children first, not the self-interest of single-sex advocates. To refuse to deprive children of what they most need, a mother and a father, is this really so difficult to understand? Is it really 'hateful?' 'ignorant?' 'discriminatory?' 'insulting?' or 'callous?' to use the Board's own words, for anyone to strive to give all children what they most need, a mother and a father?"
_______________________________________________
We have always considered this case important for the light it sheds on the infiltration of the Archdiocese of San Francisco by homosexualist activists, and the results of that infiltration. Here's the origin of "Catholic League v. San Francisco":
• Between 2001-2005 Catholic Charities of San Francisco facilitates adoptions into same-sex households.
• March 13, 2006: Those actions compelled the Vatican, through the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, to reiterate its 2003 statement, and instruct Catholic adoption agencies to stop placing children in same-sex households. On March 13, 2006, Cardinal William Levada wrote “The reasons given in the (2003) document, as well as the potential scandal for the faithful should an archdiocesan agency act contrary to the clear teaching of the church's magisterium, require that a Catholic bishop follow this clear guidance from the Holy See in his oversight of Catholic diocesan agencies."
• March 21, 2006: The Cardinal’s response to the actions of Catholic Charities results in the Board of Supervisors issuance of Resolution 168-06.
• April 4, 2006: in response to the March 21 resolution, the two San Francisco Catholics bring the suit against the city of San Francisco.
When the Supreme Court refuses to hear a case, they generally don't say why, nor did they in this case. Although the Supremes denied a hearing, the case did inspire powerful arguments, which still stand:
Judge Kleinfeld, among the dissenters in the Ninth Circuit appeal:
"The 'message' in the resolution, unlike, say, the message that might be inferred from some symbolic display, is explicit: a Catholic doctrine duly communicated by the part of the Catholic church in charge of clarifying doctrine is 'hateful,' 'defamatory,' 'insulting,' 'callous,' and 'discriminatory,' 'showing 'insensitivity and ignorance,' the Catholic Church is a hateful foreign meddler in San Francisco’s affairs, the Catholic Church ought to 'withdraw' its religious directive, and the local archbishop should defy his superior’s directive. This is indeed a 'message of . . . disapproval.' And that is all it takes for it to be unconstitutional.”
Professor Jonathon Turley, who objected to the resolution even though he personally agreed with the city's position:
"The resolution has the Board directly calling on Catholic leaders to defy the Cardinal and directly objects to the Vatican policy. That would seem to take an 'official position on religious doctrine.' I would be less concerned if the resolution solely addressed the Cardinals statement as hateful rhetoric as opposed to an official rejection of the religious based policy....
There is a good-faith debate as to whether such anti-discrimination laws violate the religion clauses. I would not criticize leaders participating in such a debate. However, the resolution in this case calls for defiance of the Cardinal and the removal of the policy."
Good Jesuit Fr. James Schall, of Georgetown, who gets right down to the nub:
"Children need a parent of each sex, whether they be 'in need' or not. Compassion does not trump principle. The Board obscures what human life and nature are about. It does this by the suasive power of civil resolution. In the end, it is not the Board that is protecting the needs and nature of real children, but the hapless Vatican.
In San Francisco, such a voice perhaps cries in the wilderness, but it cries the truth about children and their needs. It puts children first, not the self-interest of single-sex advocates. To refuse to deprive children of what they most need, a mother and a father, is this really so difficult to understand? Is it really 'hateful?' 'ignorant?' 'discriminatory?' 'insulting?' or 'callous?' to use the Board's own words, for anyone to strive to give all children what they most need, a mother and a father?"
_______________________________________________
We have always considered this case important for the light it sheds on the infiltration of the Archdiocese of San Francisco by homosexualist activists, and the results of that infiltration. Here's the origin of "Catholic League v. San Francisco":
• Between 2001-2005 Catholic Charities of San Francisco facilitates adoptions into same-sex households.
• March 13, 2006: Those actions compelled the Vatican, through the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, to reiterate its 2003 statement, and instruct Catholic adoption agencies to stop placing children in same-sex households. On March 13, 2006, Cardinal William Levada wrote “The reasons given in the (2003) document, as well as the potential scandal for the faithful should an archdiocesan agency act contrary to the clear teaching of the church's magisterium, require that a Catholic bishop follow this clear guidance from the Holy See in his oversight of Catholic diocesan agencies."
• March 21, 2006: The Cardinal’s response to the actions of Catholic Charities results in the Board of Supervisors issuance of Resolution 168-06.
• April 4, 2006: in response to the March 21 resolution, the two San Francisco Catholics bring the suit against the city of San Francisco.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
