President Obama, Please read...

Jun 26, 2009 (CNA) -- The Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in a Richmond, Va. 6-5 decision on Wednesday, June 24, upheld Virginia’s partial-birth abortion ban.

Judge Paul V. Niemeyer authored the majority opinion in Wednesday’s decision, which won the concurrence of Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III. "A partially born child is among the weakest, most helpless beings in our midst and on that account exerts a special claim on our protection," Judge Wilkinson wrote. “The fact is that we -- civilized people -- are retreating to the haven of our Constitution to justify dismembering a partly born child and crushing its skull,” his opinion continued. “Surely centuries hence, people will look back on this gruesome practice done in the name of fundamental law by a society of high achievement. And they will shudder.”
(California Catholic Daily)

Thought for the Day

"There is only one way to achieve happiness on this terrestrial ball, and that is to have either a clear conscience or none at all."
-- Ogden Nash

Speaking of MHR: Talk About Chutzpah!

Earlier this week, we received this email claiming to be from Mr. Joe Cooper, webmaster for Most Holy Redeemer parish, and a member of the MHR Pastoral Council:

Dear Mr. Cooney,

Please remove any and all photos used from the Most Holy Redeemer website from the following web page: http://johnmalloysdb.blogspot.com/ There was no permission asked or consent given to use these photos.

In the future, please refrain from the use of any verbiage or photos from the website for any of the websites administered by yourself or Fr. John Malloy, including but not limited to:

http://johnmalloysdb.blogspot.com/
http://www.sanfrancisco-catholic.com/

I would appreciate your cooperation in this matter. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at this address.

Thank you.

Joe Cooper
Most Holy Redeemer Web Administrator

Here's comes the chutzpah: the email was cc’d to His Excellency Archbishop George Niederauer; as well as to Most Holy Redeemer pastor Fr. Steve Meriwether; Mr. Maurice Healy, Executive Editor of Catholic San Francisco; and Fr. John Itzaina, pastor of Saints Peter and Paul Church.

We find it delicious that in the very week His Excellency Archbishop Niederauer was awarded a “Pink Brick” at the instigation of Most Holy Redeemer Pastoral Council member Matt Dorsey (see “Niederuaer Deserves Pink Brick” in the Bay Area Reporter) for his "remorseless" support of natural marriage, another member of the MHR Pastoral Council, Joe Cooper, chose to copy the Archbishop on this email.

We hope His Excellency, and Mr. Healy, and Fr. Itzaina had an opportunity to view the photos in question. (Since MHR is Fr. Meriwether’s parish, he probably doesn’t need photos.) They are instructive: one shows two openly same-sex "married" persons, plus a very open and active member of the "leather community" serving at Mass, one shows a "transgender" MHR Eucharistic Minister presenting the MHR Young Adults Group as "debutantes "at the 2007 "SF Transgender Cotillion", and one shows Fr. Donal Godfrey, Executive Director of Campus Ministry at USF with his arm around another guy at the 2003 Gay Pride parade. We don't blame Most Holy Redeemer for being touchy--as we have pointed out before, they are the only parish in the history of the Roman Catholic Church to have photos of parish events posted on a website that requires an obscenity disclaimer.

We respect Mr. Cooper's request, but we think the creation of a counter-church in the Castro is a very important event, and one that deserves full coverage. And it's our opinion that material which is posted on a non-commercial website which is then posted (with proper credit) on another non-commercial website for purpose of criticism, comment, and education, constitutes fair use.

Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney

"Public Ridicule and Defiance"

The blatant defiance of Church teaching over at Most Holy Redeemer is being noticed far and wide. The latest is yesterday's column by Deacon Keith Fournier, over at Catholic Online:

Excerpts:

"Expose and Engage the ‘Fifth Column’ in the Catholic Church"

"On Wednesday, I wrote a story for Catholic Online entitled 'Archbishop Niederauer to be Mocked by Homosexuals for His Support of Marriage'. Itconcerned the plan to publicly ridicule the Archbishop for his clear and courageous defense of marriage. This will be done within the context of the 39th San Francisco Pride Celebration and Parade on June 27 and June 28th. Homosexual activists will give him the so called 'Pink Brick award' and publicly
mock him.

To regular readers of Catholic Online, the extreme antics of some within the homosexual community in San Francisco should come as no surprise. However it is evident from some of our recent letters with our rapidly growing readership that some of our newer readers were shocked by one dimension of this story. That was the participation of some Catholics from the Most Holy Redeemer Parish of San Francisco in this act of public ridicule and defiance.

Here is an excerpt from just one letter we received: 'Dear Catholic Online Editor, Do I understand correctly that there is a Catholic Church (Most Holy Redeemer) in San Francisco that supports the LGBT lifestyle? … Is the whole parish approving of the LGBT? Has the Archbishop denounced the Parish, if this is the case? I don’t understand. Am I the only Catholic left in a total quandary by your posted articles on the activities at Most Holy Redeemer Church and the Archbishop of San Francisco?'

Deacon Fournier responded to the questioner:

'First, I do not know whether it can be said that the Parish 'supports' the lifestyle. However, a trip to the website is quite informative (http://www.mhr.org/). Even a cursory review of its history and public posture seems to point in that direction. However, I do know that a member of their Parish Council, Matt Dorsey, in a May 28, 2009 opinion piece he wrote for the 'Bay Area Reporter', proposed the awarding of this Pink Brick to his own Archbishop."

We are a little less unsure than Deacon Fournier. For all intents and purposes, the proper answer to the question is "yes." We refer readers of our post of January 4, 2009

"Most Holy Redeemer Pastor Sympathizes with Prop. 8 Vandals--Just Sorry They Picked His Church."

The post included this all-too-believable quote given by Pastor Steve Meriwether to KCBS radio:

"Pastor Steve Meriweather told KCBS his parishioners actually share the vandals' sentiment against Prop 8. 'I think it's unfortunate that they selected ourcommunity to attack,' said Meriweather, 'because it's the wrong one.'

We continued:

"So one can understand Fr. Meriwether's surprise and chagrin at "his" church being attacked. He's got seven (at least) lectors, acolytes, and/or Eucharistic Ministers on staff who have "married" persons of the same-sex and at least five current and former Pastoral Council members who donated to the 'No on Proposition 8 Campaign.'

I mean, what more does he need to do to prove his credibility to the gay community?"

Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney

They're Losing it Over at "America"

Over the past few weeks we've been blogging about the increasingly odd writing coming out of America magazine, and the responses it has engendered.

We've been following Fr. Z's responses (see here and here) to America's editorials. And last Thursday, we covered Jack Smith's very hard-hitting post, "America Mag's Calumny in Sevice of a Human Master."

Today Carl Olsen, over at Ignatius Press weighs in, with "What Planet is America Magazine Living On?" One of the items Mr. Olsen responds to is the column "Obama Going to the Vatican" by Michael Sean Winters. Mr. Winters' column ran to 631 words, but I can give you the sense here:

1) "Conservative" Catholics objected to Notre Dame honoring Barack Obama.
2) But the Holy Father will meet with Barack Obama.
3) Therefore, the objectors were wrong, and it was OK for Notre Dame to honor Barack Obama.

I'm serious--that's his argument. The refutations are so immediate and obvious that I won't bother. Anyway, Mr. Olsen knocks Mr. Winters and America out of the park. The comments are interesting, too.

Throwing oil on the blaze of teenage sex

Carolyn Moynihan 24 Jun 2009
From the country that brought you the highest teenage pregnancy rate in Europe -- television ads for condoms and abortion. Will the British government never get it? The more “harm reduction” they go in for, the worse the problem gets.

Friday last saw the end of a three-month consultation by the government’s broadcasting standards watchdog, the BCAP, on a proposal to allow abortion clinics to advertise on TV before 9pm. Condom ads, currently confined to one channel, would also be shown in the earlier time slot. Pro-life pregnancy counselling services could also advertise -- if they could afford it -- but would have to make it clear that they do not refer for abortion, “so that delays do not result in medical complications,” as one news report puts it. It would be too bad, wouldn't it, if women had time to think about what they were doing.

Already the morning after pill is advertised after 9pm on three channels. If the proposed broadcasting regime goes ahead it would be one of the most liberal in the world. The BCAP says it is responding to government calls for action to combat rising teenage pregnancy. Some doctors, at least, are against the move. The Mail on Sunday reports:
Dr Mark Pickering, a GP in York, said: ‘We know that TV is a powerful medium which gives young people messages that sex is fine, sex is great and they are not getting enough of it. It is full of beautiful young people jumping in and out of bed with each other. Allowing abortion services to advertise on TV would then be saying, “Here is a quick medical fix for the consequences of having sex.” That is giving all the wrong messages and is very disturbing.’
Dr Pickering said doctors at a meeting of the British Medical Association next Sunday would vote against it.

In a submission prepared by the Linacre Centre for Healthcare Ethics, the Catholic bishops of England and Wales pointed out that abortion is still illegal in the UK unless it meets certain criteria and that advertising it like a consumer product would send a profoundly misleading message. It would further normalise an action that is the deliberate taking of an innocent human life, and would increase the number of abortions and sexual infections -- which the country is supposed to be trying to reduce.

“What is needed is the development and financing of a comprehensive programme aimed at reducing the abortion rate and promoting positive values of human life and relationships.”
Advertising condoms to those under 16 would contribute to the sexualization of children, raising legal as well as moral issues since the age of consent is still 16, the statement said. No evidence had been given for the claim that that it will combat teenage pregnancy and STI rates;in fact, the opposite may happen, as even those who support condom use admit to frustration when it comes to reducing STIs in practice.

“The analogy between condom promotion campaigns and promotion of “reduced risk” cigarettes may be instructive. Whereas young people are standardly advised to reduce risks of sex by using condoms, rather than abstain, health campaigns have tended to urge smokers to ‘quit’, rather than promoting ‘reduced risk’ cigarettes. One study found that “the unregulated promotion of “reduced risk” products threatens to undermine smoking cessation (which is proven to save lives), cause former smokers to resume their addiction, and even attract young people to tobacco products.”

The bishops’ statement concludes:
Our society is already failing young people by presenting an impoverished view of sex, too often entirely separated from any context of committed love and readiness for parenthood. It is very important that this process is not encouraged by a willingness to advertise services which have already done enormous damage to perceptions of sex in our society. In the many cases where respect for life, as well as sex and marriage, is at issue, the situation is still more serious, since not only the rights of young people are at stake, but those of any child they conceive. Respect for life, sex and parenthood are central to a healthy society, and advertising standards should reflect this.”

Let’s hope common sense if not moral sense prevails in the government. But with lords and baronesses pushing sexual pragmatism, the odds are stacked against it, one fears.

Good News from Boston! Cardinal O'Malley Teaches!

From Boston.com h/t Curt Jester:

Caritas Ends Venture Over Abortion Issue

"Caritas Christi Health Care, the financially challenged Catholic hospital system founded by the Archdiocese of Boston, is abruptly ending its joint venture with a Missouri-based health insurer at the insistence of Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley, who has decided that the relationship represented too much of an entanglement between Catholic hospitals and abortion providers."


"The dramatic development, just days before the joint venture was scheduled to start providing care to low-income residents as part of the state's efforts to establish near universal health coverage here, is a vindication of sorts for a variety of very conservative Catholic critics of the cardinal, who have been arguing angrily and loudly that it would be "evil" for Caritas to partner with a health provider that covers abortion services."

(Yeah. It's "very conservative Catholics" who think abortion is "evil.") More, from the joint statement of the Archdiocese of Boston and Caritas:

"Cardinal Seán P. O'Malley said, 'I am pleased that Caritas Christi was able to achieve this outcome. Throughout this process, our singular goal has been to provide for the needs of the poor and underserved in a manner that is fully and completely in accord with Catholic moral teaching. By withdrawing from the joint venture and serving the poor as a provider in the Connector, upholding Catholic moral teaching at all times, they are able to carry forward the critical mission of Catholic health care."

........

"Expansion of Caritas' care for the poor and the uninsured was the original motivating force in entering the agreement with Celtic Group, Inc. (a subsidiary of Centene Corporation). Catholic health care in the United States has two principal goals: providing health care for all, a basic requirement of social justice; and protecting the sacredness of human life from conception until natural death. The protection of human life and dignity demands that Catholic institutions never contribute to procedures which are inconsistent with Catholic moral teaching, such as abortion and sterilization. These procedures and others are prohibited by the Ethical and Religious Directives of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops."

"Having withdrawn from the original joint venture, the provider agreement will allow Caritas Christi to fulfill its mission of serving the poor without participation or cooperation in procedures forbidden by the moral teaching of the Catholic Church"

God bless his Eminence!

"That is not the way a Christian works for the Risen Lord. But their master is not Risen. He resides at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue."

Jack Smith has a very hard-hitting post today over at "The Catholic Key" exposing the duplicitous methods the editors of America magazine are using to smear Kansas City Bishop Joseph Finn. The editors of America were attempting to tie His Excellency to the killing of Dr. George Tiller. These are the same guys who are always making phony pleas for "civility" and "courtesy."

Mr. Smith shreds their "arguments," and concludes:

"So why would the editors at America, NCR, and Commonweal, who all got on this anti-bishop bandwagon, attempt to associate Bishop Finn and by extension other outspoken bishops and the pro-life movement as a whole with murder and truly incendiary speech and threats? Why would they seek to make those who have consistently at personal cost defended human life, the enemies of life?

Is it because the ultimate strategy for them to “Sing a New Church Into Being,” is to alienate the Faithful from their Shepherds? Is it because the defenders of life have criticized their master? They will muster any excuse for him, praise him immodestly for actions he has not taken, and destroy the reputations of any who dissent from him.

That is not the way a Christian works for the Risen Lord. But their master is not Risen. He resides at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. And serving a man this way is idolatry."

Readers will remember America's May 25 article by Fr. John O'Malley: "Barack Obama and Vatican II," which opened with the statement "We have a Vatican II President." If that's so, the true colors of these "supporters" of Vatican II are being unveiled at last. They now realize that their agenda is not something that will ever be supported by the Catholic Church. If a faithful Catholic realized that, he would abandon his agenda. But the editors of America have decided to keep the agenda and abandon the Church. As Mr. Smith said, they have hitched their wagon to a politician.

Fr. Z has also been exposing America magazine. Some recent examples are here, and here.

Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney

Disgraced ex-President was Pro-Choice

Another real winner in the pro-choice camp. From LifeSiteNews:

"WASHINGTON, D.C., June 23, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Although US President Richard Nixon remained silent on the landmark 1973 Supreme Court rulings that legalized abortion on demand, newly released tapes show the disgraced President actually believed legal abortion was “necessary” in certain cases, such as when the baby was of mixed-race or conceived through rape."

‘If fatherhood begins at conception, when does life begin?’

Simple, short video from the Family Research Council. H/t American Papist.

"A new advertisement from the Family Research Council’s lobbying arm, FRC Action, cites Sen. Barack Obama’s endorsement of fathers who “recognize that responsibility doesn’t just end at conception” to press the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee to defend his stand on abortion."--Catholic News Agency

Tom Peters comments:

"And smart not because it scores 'political points,' but because it challenges Obama and the pro-abortion movement to face the contradictory nature of the two things they are trying to say. The only conclusion that they can arrive at - but they avoid it at all costs - is that they honestly believe you can end human life when it is inconvenient. That's an inhuman solution."

Support for Same-Sex "Marriage" Dips

When it's an issue the mainsteam media supports, they describe a 9% drop as a "dip" and a "slight decline." In an election, 9% is a landslide. Still, it is good news. The public is thinking about what marriage really is.

Poll: Support For Gay Marriage Dips

(CBS) Support for same-sex marriage has declined slightly from two months ago, a new CBS News/New York Times poll finds.

Most Americans support some legal recognition of a same-sex couple’s relationship. The poll found 33 percent favor marriage for same-sex couples, down somewhat from a high of 42 percent in April, and another 30 percent support civil unions. A third of Americans think there should be no legal recognition of a same-sex couple’s relationship. Views in this poll are similar to those found back in March of this year....

This poll was conducted among a random sample of 895 adults nationwide,
interviewed by telephone June 12-16, 2009. Phone numbers were dialed from
RDD samples of both standard land-lines and cell phones. The error due to
sampling for results based on the entire sample could be plus or minus three
percentage points. The error for subgroups is higher. This poll release
conforms to the Standards of Disclosure of the National Council on Public Poll.

Candian Catholic Relief Service and Abortion: "Secular Messianism"

There's a battle going on in Canada over the Canadian Catholic Organization for Development and Peace (CCODP or D&P). Development and Peace is the Canadian counterpart to the Unites States' Catholic Relief Services. Development and Peace has a long history of anti-Catholic activities.

Throughout 2009, LifeSiteNews has documented "that over 20 of Development & Peace’s partners around the world are involved in abortion and/or contraception advocacy." On April 17, 2009 LifeSiteNews published a list of some of the organizations that are funded by, or partners with, Development and Peace, along with their objectionable activities. The list can be found here.

On May 28, 2009, the Peruvian bishops sent a letter to the Canadian Bishops, objecting to Development and Peace's funding of pro-abortion groups in Peru, and they asked that such funding be stopped. From the letter:

"It is very disturbing to have groups which work against the Bishops of Peru by attempting to undermine legal protection for the right to life of unborn children, be funded by our brother bishops in Canada."

Yesterday, the Vatican News Service radio reported the story, under the headline “Aid for Food and Medicines, Not for Birth Control, Needed in Latin America.” The broadcast can be heard by following the link..

The response of the Candian bishops has been decidely mixed. From yesterday's LifeSiteNews article:

"Archbishop James Weisgerber, the President of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB), has claimed that there is “no evidence” of abortion involvement on the part of groups funded by the bishops’ official development arm, the Canadian Catholic Organization for Development and Peace (D&P). The remarks were made in response to questions about the results of a recent investigation into five of D&P’s Mexican partners, which LifeSiteNews.com (LSN) had reported in early March were involved in abortion advocacy." ...

"The archbishop made his statements in support of D&P despite a recent letter from the family commission of the Peruvian Bishops Conference, in which the Peruvian bishops formally requested the Canadian Bishops to stop funding three pro-abortion groups in their country. LSN has also documented evidence – including interviews and photographs - that over 20 of D&P’s partners around the world are involved in abortion and/or contraception advocacy (read all the evidence here)."...

Despite Archbishop Weisgerber’s assertions, the bishops of Canada do not appear to all be on the same page when it comes to the question of D&P. Insiders have
informed LSN that most of the bishops of Quebec are onside with the organization, with a few notable exceptions. However, most Ontario bishops have taken the allegations seriously enough to withhold funding until the results of the investigation have been considered."....

His Excellency then made this strange argument:

“It seems that there is a tendency on the part of some people to trust allegations on websites more than they trust the bishops,” he said. “That’s the role of the bishops in the Church and when the bishops investigate something, when the bishops look at things and when the bishops teach, according to our theology, we should have confidence in that.”

But that "argument" is not in any way responsive to the evidence presented by LifeSiteNews (and others) at all.

In the article cited in our first paragraph Fr. Alphonse de Valk, editor of Catholic Insight magazine, explored the roots of the scandal:

"In September 1968, the majority of the bishops had deleted Pope Paul's encyclical Humanae Vitae as unsuited for Canadians. That ended all teaching and all preaching against contraceptives; indeed, it ended the bishops' interest in family morality. They closed the conference's Bureau of Family Life in 1973 . . .

"The Church, as many thought, having emancipated itself from narrow-mindedness in family morality, presently offered a secular messianism through economic and political activism."