More News Highlights

Some more recent news highlights...

* A Cincinnati cemetery containing the graves of several of the diocese's first bishops was vandalized over the weekend. The damage is said to total at least $250K. The bishops' graves themselves were not vandalized

* The new Coadjutor Bishop of Trenton (NJ) said it took "about two seconds" for him to come up with his Episcopal motto, "Ministrare non Ministrari" (Latin for "to serve and not to be served"). He said, "This is how I want to live out my life as a bishop and how I hope to exercise that responsibility." The new bishop has asked for prayers

* Reportedly, BBC staff may "black out live coverage of the Pope's [September 2010] visit to Britain in a row over pension cuts". It is claimed the plan may "ruin the papal trip for many British Catholics"

* An 83 year-old priest has been tortured and killed in Mexico. A motive of robbery has not been ruled out, but the case remains under investigation. Parishioners reportedly found his body in his office after the murder

* The U.K.'s 'Daily Mail' is reporting that a British soldier in Afghanistan believes he was saved by his rosary. Apparently, the rosary fell to the ground and the soldier discovered he was on a land mine as he bent over to retrieve it. As a result, he was able to survive the incident. Reportedly, his great-grandfather was similarly saved by a rosary while serving in WWII

* A suspected drunk driver with previous DUI's has been charged in connection with a head-on auto collision that killed one nun and critically injured two other nuns in Virginia. The 23 year-old suspect, an illegal alien, had two previous DUI's in the past five years and was driving at the time with a revoked license. He was reportedly awaiting deportation at the time of the collision

* As if it wasn't bad enough: The president of the CBS television network has apologized for the station's "low rating" regarding the amount of programming classified as "LGBT-inclusive." The network is reportedly "disappointed" by the "low rating" and will "try to do better" in the future

* Chilean Cardinal Francisco Javier Errazuriz called same sex 'marriages' an "aberration", noting that such 'marriages' "are a mistaken path that is not one of happiness, of a home formed by a father and a mother with many children"

* A Louisiana priest has admitted to abusing more than 30 boys. The abusive priest claims he was himself abused as a boy by a seminary professor

* The cloistered French nuns who recently signed a record deal to sing Gregorian chant have received death threats via a web page. They have reported the threats to the police and have asked them to keep a "closer watch" on the convent

* Fr. Barry Fischer, Pontifical Commissary to Miles Jesu recently released a statement affirming that the founder of the institute "presented erratic behaviors that were totally beyond the scope of the powers given to him. Some members have identified wounds caused by the inappropriate exercise of authority under his leadership. The mistaken sense of allegiance and obedience instilled in the membership facilitated his behavior, which was totally unacceptable and not in accord with the discipline of the Church nor supportable in any way by a healthy sense of consecrated life"

* More than fifty thousand altar servers from over a dozen countries are expected to attend an altar server pilgrimage in Rome in early August. The majority of the participants are expected to come from European countries for the anticipated "record turnout"

* The president emeritus of the Pontifical Academy for Life, Bishop Elio Sgreccia, has strongly condemned the FDA's decision to permit Geron Corp. to proceed with embryonic stem cell testing, referring to the plan as a "sacrifice" of human beings and "a crime" [Note: The Church condemns use of embryonic stem cells that require destruction of human life, whereas the Church supports use of adult stem cells since their use does not require the destruction of human life]

* No obligation to obey just laws? No concern for American victims? No duty to defend one's borders? Mexican bishops have issued a "message of solidarity" expressing their "profound sorrow" regarding Arizona's new immigration law and they have lamented the "profound suffering experienced by our fellow countrymen and our Latin American brothers and sisters in the United States in general." They called on God to "move the hearts of all those who because they do not know the Father of all have not been able to find brotherliness, tolerance and mercy within themselves." Comment: Perhaps the Mexican bishops should be reminded of these papal statements...

"To despise legitimate authority, in whomsoever vested, is unlawful, as a rebellion against the divine will, and whoever resists that, rushes willfully to destruction. 'He that resisteth the power resisteth the ordinance of God, and they that resist, purchase to themselves damnation.' To cast aside obedience, and by popular violence to incite to revolt, is therefore treason, not against man only, but against God." (Pope Leo XIII, "Immortale Dei", 1885)

"Take pains to impress on the Christian people a due obedience and subjection to rulers and governments. Do this by teaching, in accordance with the warning of the Apostle, that all authority comes from God. Whoever resists authority resists the ordering made by God Himself, consequently achieving his own condemnation; disobeying authority is always sinful except when an order is given which is opposed to the laws of God and the Church." (Pope Pius IX, "Qui Pluribus", 1846)

"Therefore, warn your faithful that the very nature of human society obligates its members to obey its lawfully established authority; nothing in the precepts of the Lord on this subject, which are proclaimed in holy scripture, can be altered. For it is written: 'Be subject to every human institution for God's sake, to the king as supreme or to governors as sent by him to punish wrongdoers and to praise those who do right. For it is God's will that by doing right, you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish men. Be as free men, yet without using freedom as a pretext for evil, but be as servants of God' (I Pt. 2:13f). And again: 'Let ever soul be subject to the higher authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore, he who resists authority resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur their own condemnation' (Rom. 13:1f)." (Pope Pius IX, "Nostis et Nobiscum", 1849)

Related: Civics 101: Breaking the law is not okay

* That should help building fund collections: A recent decision of the Apostolic Signatura affirming that bishops can close any parish - even if it is financially viable - "for the good of the diocese" and despite parishioners' objections was the subject of a recent article on the U.S. bishops' news service website. The article quoted a member of a group of "committed concerned Catholics formed to support parishes subject to closure" who said that "no parish is safe" and that parishes have "become expendable"

Commentary: While "the good of the diocese" should be synonymous with "the good of souls", who doubts this ruling may translate into "the good of the bishop"? How exactly does closing beloved parishes help souls or dioceses - especially when parishes to be closed are financially viable? How does cutting down the number of sacraments, potentially alienating faithful Catholics, and turning churches into museums or apartments or mosques benefit the diocese? Perhaps the closure & sale of churches may help with abuse settlements in the short term, but then what? Don't such actions risk turning the Catholics who lovingly built, supported & maintained 'seized & sold' parishes into "victims", so to speak? Does it seem just that Catholics are frequently expected to help purchase assets for a parish and are then given no voice whatsoever concerning their subsequent disposal? Doesn't this ruling especially jeopardize 'high value' parishes (e.g. older parishes with much valuable land)? And does anyone who has been paying attention for the last 40 years doubt that liberal bishops will take advantage of this ruling to close 'nuisance' parishes (e.g. ones that foster tradition, have TLM's, etc.)? Furthermore, doesn't the ruling risk harming parishioners' loyalty as the faithful grasp the possible impermanence of their parishes? Might it not also spark competition rather than cooperation among parishes as each 'competes' to be the one to stay open? Does it not seem likely that the fate of churches will be treated as if the closure of a parish was merely a 'business decision' rather than an action which will have serious consequences on priceless eternal souls? In any event, it seems that only in crazy times like these would the closure of any of our churches be considered as being for the "good" of a diocese.

[8/2]

Some More News Highlights

More recent news highlights...

* A "little nun with a commanding voice" in Pittsburgh foiled a recent robbery attempt by instructing a thief to return a wallet he had taken from a car via an open window. Reportedly, the thief apologized to the 5'3" sister and returned the stolen wallet

* Pope Benedict has apparently accepted an invitation to visit Ukraine in 2012. A formal announcement is expected to be forthcoming

* Reports indicate that a two hour long Eucharistic adoration service "in reparation for abuses committed by priests and for the healing of this wound within the church" will take place this Saturday at St. Peter's Basilica

* Pope Benedict recently told the Italian bishops that society is facing a "cultural and spiritual crisis, as serious as the economic crisis." He also encouraged the bishops not to give up their efforts to provide a true Catholic education

* A Catholic priest in Arizona is leading an effort to put an initiative on the ballot aimed at repealing/changing the state's new anti-illegal immigration law. The priest's initiative also seeks a three-year moratorium to prevent future immigration related legislation. It will reportedly be "a real challenge" for supporters to obtain the number of signatures needed to qualify the measure for the ballot [Related: Civics 101: Breaking the law is not okay]

* Shameful: According to reports, a group of women who have had relationships with priests sent an open letter to Pope Benedict requesting an end to priestly celibacy [Commentary: These (brazen!) women imagine that these men would honor vows to them even though these same men failed to honor vows to the all-holy God?] Note: Click here for the importance of & reasons for priestly celibacy

* More bad news: A Jesuit investigation found that some 205 allegations of abuse have been made against priests at the order's schools in Germany. The investigation reportedly revealed "decades of systematic abuse and attempts of a cover-up" in the order, for which a Jesuit official acknowledged "shame and guilt"

* Well said: An editorial penned by a Fall River priest concerning a recent decision to bar a child with lesbian 'parents' from admission to a Catholic school has indicated that the decision "wasn’t a bigoted decision at all, but a courageous, principled, and undoubtedly difficult one, seeking the good of the eight year-old boy and the rest of the children at the school." He noted that "there is a requirement, for the good of the child, that the parents commit to raise the child in a situation that at least does not contradict the values and formation given at the school" and that "If the child’s education will not be coupled to a way of life consistent with it, the parents and school would be placing the child in a spiritually and morally schizophrenic situation - which is obviously harmful." [Related: Defending the Indefensible | Catholic education begins at home]

* More immigration-related news: According to at least one source, the Mass of Reception for the new Coadjutor Archbishop of Los Angeles was "marked by clear indications that support for immigrants will be a priority" for the future leader of the nation's largest diocese. The multi-lingual service included a "lengthy homily" spoken in English and in Spanish. During the talk, Cardinal Mahony said that "A good shepherd here will of necessity work tirelessly for just immigration policies and for the protection of the dignity of all our immigrants", whereas the Mexican-born Archbishop Gomez (now a citizen of the U.S.) said, that "God is with us, and in his loving eyes, no one is a stranger for him, and no one is an alien for any of us." Archbishop Gomez is the first Hispanic archbishop of Los Angeles. He has been "active in the Hispanic community" and has served as chairman of the Committee on Cultural Diversity in the Church [Related: Civics 101: Breaking the law is not okay]

[5/27]

More News Highlights

Some more recent news highlights...

* A group of 'traditionalist' Anglican 'bishops'* have reportedly met at the Vatican and are prepared to convert under the terms of Anglicanorum Coetibus, bringing numerous 'clergy'* & followers with them (described as "an exodus", conversion "en masse") [* Reminder: Anglican 'clergy' are not true priests or bishops - their orders have been ruled invalid by the Church: "Wherefore, strictly adhering, in this matter, to the decrees of the pontiffs, our predecessors, and confirming them most fully, and, as it were, renewing them by our authority, of our own initiative and certain knowledge, we pronounce and declare that ordinations carried out according to the Anglican rite have been, and are, absolutely null and utterly void." (Pope Leo XIII, "Apostolicae Curae", 1896 A.D., emphasis added)]

* In another obvious demonstration of media bias, an AP article covering the Pope's visit to the Shroud bears the headline "Pope takes break from scandal, visits Turin Shroud"

* Michael Schiavo is reportedly considering suing over the use of Terri Schiavo's name by a foundation that presently assists disabled persons in need of medical care. He apparently believes he has legal "rights" to her name. [Commentary: Maybe he'd prefer this name...?: "Foundation to prevent adulterous husbands from killing their disabled wives through painful starvation & dehydration after their wives' money runs out"]

* This past weekend, the soon-to-be outgoing head of the Los Angeles Archdiocese, Cardinal Roger Mahony, attended an 'immigration rights' protest and thanked Arizona for the momentum. The notoriously liberal Cardinal Mahony, a known sympathizer for law-breaking immigrants, recently compared Arizona's new law allowing police to check the status of those suspected of being in the country illegally to Nazi Germany. [Commentary: Given instances of liturgical abuse in the L.A. diocese, could one be forgiven for suspecting the Cardinal has about as much respect for 'liturgical law' as he apparently does for civil law?] [Related: Civics 101: Breaking the law is not okay]

[5/3]

Rewarding lawbreakers

The president of the USCCB has called for "comprehensive immigration reform legislation". He claims "we do not approve or encourage the illegal entry of anyone into our country" but then seems to call for amnesty. Isn't amnesty essentially "approving and encouraging" those who have broken the law? Could someone please explain how it is possible to "not approve or encourage" breaking the law if you reward precisely those who do break the law? Even elementary school children are smart enough to know that rewards influence behavior. Our bishops don't know that? [Note: Previous story here] [6/18]

Civics 101: Breaking the law is not okay

Many bishops seem to have lost sight of a basic fundamental duty of all individuals: don't break the law. Persons whose first act on U.S. soil is to sneak into the country illegally have already showed contempt for our laws. And, these same persons must continue to lie & break laws in order to remain here. The facts clearly show that illegals burden law-abiding citizens with immense costs. They force the closure of hospitals, raise insurance and healthcare prices, drive down wages, clog jails and courts. They drive without insurance, take our jobs, use up our resources, burden and overcrowd the state-run education, justice & welfare systems, and cost law-abiding citizens huge amounts to support them. These illegals are responsible for much crime - including violent crime - and saddle society with incalculable societal and financial costs.

The illegals themselves have no sense of respect for the law (they have repeatedly shown contempt for it) and no sense of patriotism (how can you be a patriot of a country when you refuse to honor its laws?). They often reject our culture (even the good parts), bring disease, increase racial tension, and cause offense to others (e.g. by urinating on walls, housing multiple families in overcrowded, unsanitary & unsafe dwellings, bearing numerous children out of wedlock, littering, loitering, vandalism, etc.). Some illegals use stolen identities. Frequently, illegals fail to pay taxes, drive without licenses, and refuse to learn our language. Some even fly their country's flags on our soil. Many have the attitude that we "owe them". They are not citizens of our country, but invaders.

Apparently, however, some bishops think we should "look the other way" and treat them as if they are just regular 'citizens'. But this is not true. They are trespassers - even robbers. One could say they "steal" taxpayer money - your money. A country is not obligated to support anyone who shows up on its soil any more than a Catholic man is obligated to welcome into his home anyone who shows up at his doorstep. Rather, it is the Catholic man's duty to prevent the invasion of his home in order to protect those who live there. Likewise, it is a country's duty to protect her citizens. Charity yes, anarchy & robbery no.

The United States already gives billions in aid to countries all over the world and allows thousands of LEGAL immigrants to enter the country every year - we are far more generous than any other country on the face of the earth. We are certainly not lacking in charity. However, we should not reward those who break into our country illegally and show contempt for our laws. Rather, we should send them home. And we should bill them for it.

However, some bishops do not seem to see it this way. Instead, they apparently want U.S. citizens to cough up even more money for "comprehensive health care" for illegals. Have they completely lost sight of the fact that taxpayers are already at their limit? Do they really think it is right to overwhelm our medical system with millions of persons who show no regard for our laws and make us pay for it? Do they really fail to see the injustice in this? Or, is the real truth that many bishops back illegals because they "fill the pews" and add to the collection box?

It's time for Catholics to take a stand. Tell your bishops that you resent their supporting illegals' breaking of our just laws. Remind them charity must be voluntary, not forced - and that it is your right to determine who to direct your charity towards. Ask them to stop scandalously disregarding basic laws & justice. Tell them you want to be protected from lawbreakers, cheaters & thieves. Tell them you want illegals sent back to their own country for "comprehensive health care". Tell them you reject amnesty for lawbreakers. Tell them you don't want to support foreigners' children who are born here at your expense (children who should rightly be considered illegal, not 'citizens' to reward with your tax dollars). And then remind them that you lovingly welcome immigrants who come here legally and who respect our laws.

And finally, when they accuse you of not being "charitable", remind them that it is not a duty of charity to aid persons to break laws, cheat, lie, and (essentially) steal. Furthermore, ask them if they are the ones who are not being charitable by their wrongly disregarding the just laws of this country and the common good of its law-abiding citizens as well as their potentially endangering innocent persons.

Should they dispute this, consider offering to take them on a trip to jails, courthouses, welfare offices, closed hospitals, crime-ridden border cities, etc. to see the cost to others of their supposed "charity".

[5/28]