Sadly, Fr. Rosica can't let it go

Fr. Rosica has again had another outburst against bloggers. He's taken his message on the road, this time to Rome, at the plenary assembly of the Pontifical Council for Social Communications.

He made some good points about how the media tends to exhibit a moral bias. He also accurately pointed out how the media tends to "dumb down" the message and how form often becomes more important than substance.  People have lost intellectual rigor and are unwilling to pay attention for more than 15 seconds unless you flash some spectacular picture on the tube.

But he couldn't resist attacking bloggers - again.  Here's the relevant excerpt:

"On the Internet there is no accountability, no code of ethics, and no responsibility for one’s words and actions. [...]

"One of the challenges for the Church is that the Internet can destroy or confuse the hierarchy of information-providing that church agencies have worked so hard to establish. Web sites and blogs tend to concentrate on negative messages."

The result, Father Rosica contended, is that "Christians are known as the people who are against everything."

There is truth in his statements. The Internet is certainly open to everybody and accountability works only indirectly, through peer pressure and reputation.  But this freedom is also one of its great strengths, in that bloggers can't be fired or shut down if the powers that be don't agree with their message.

Honestly, I'm not too sure that "old" media has much accountability or responsibility either.  Radio,

Exclusive: Father Rosica approval rating under 20%

Many of you are aware of the Father Rosica scandal that erupted over the past month.  You can read about it here.

Catholic Dialogue was interested in getting a broader sense of how Internet-literate Catholics were reacting to Fr. Rosica's unexplainable outburst.  To do this, we conducted extensive research on the Internet in order to see which way the wind was blowing.  Today, we are presenting these exclusive results.

Clearly, Fr. Rosica is facing serious headwinds in the court of public opinion.

The research revealed that 80.5% of all the articles that expressed an opinion on the controversy were opposed to Fr. Rosica's position, while only 19.5% supported him.  The methodology encompasses all online articles published on the Fr. Rosica controversy, but excludes "comments" posted on blogs, since these can easily be manipulated.

In case you're wondering, articles by LifeSiteNews represented a very small fraction of the articles published on this issue.  Excluding articles from LifeSiteNews, the disapproval rating for Fr. Rosica is still 79.8%.  

The disapproval of Fr. Rosica is widespread and broad-based.  It includes both men and women, laity and clergy.  They quote Church documents and Doctors of the Church.  They refer to authoritative statements by Vatican officials.  By all accounts, these are educated Catholics, well-versed in Scripture and the Catechism.  They do not seek personal glory or satisfaction.  They do not have any axe to grind.  They are merely seeking to denounce errors and injustices so that the Church in Canada may once again submit to Rome's authority.    

In theological terms, we'd say that the sensus fidelium is enabling the faithful to participate in Christ's prophetic office by denouncing error.  In layman's terms, we'd say that Fr. Rosica's behaviour doesn't pass the sniff test.

This doesn't bode well for Salt and Light's ratings.  But it is certainly good news in the battle for the soul of the Church, since the Internet reaches such a broader audience than a satellite cable network.  

The winds of change are blowing.  There is a growing sense that too many clergymen are lukewarm or outright dissenters.  The discontent among the faithful will be a powerful instrument to help the Church return to authentic Magisterial teaching in union with the Vatican.

Please pray for Fr. Rosica and all clergy. 

Novena for the conversion of Fr. Rosica

"As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign Lord, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn from their ways and live." (Ez 33:11)

As I explained in an earlier post, Fr. Rosica has deviated from sound Catholic teaching.  I would like to start a novena for him on Saturday, September 26, the feast of the Canadian martyrs.  The novena will run until Sunday, October 4, the feast of St. Francis of Assisi.  The Lord said to St. Francis:  "Rebuild my Church, which you see is falling into ruin."  That's exactly what we're hoping to do with this novena.

Please join me in saying one Our Father, one Hail Mary and one Glory Be for the next nine days for the conversion of Fr. Rosica.  He is a very gifted man.  We need him to be fully on the side of Truth if we are to bring about a Culture of Life in Canada. I want to see him in Heaven some day, assuming that I get in.

The Father Rosica controversy

Rather Thomas Rosica, who heads the TV network Salt and Light, has recently caused quite a stir in the pro-life community.  Here is a brief summary of what happened.

Following the funeral of Ted Kennedy, in which the former senator was portrayed as a hero and a faithful Catholic despite his pro-abortion and anti-family views, many pro-lifers felt outraged that such an ardent promoter of the culture of death would receive such a glorious public Catholic funeral.  Some people (unwisely) contacted Salt and Light asking them to provide negative coverage of the event.
Instead, they got a series of aggressive and vitriolic attacks from Fr. Rosica against the pro-life movement in general and LifeSiteNews.com in particular. Father Rosica took exception to the idea that pro-life Catholics could use strong language to criticize other Catholics. Father Rosica presented these criticisms as being uncharitable, divisive, unmerciful and non-Christian.

To illustrate, I've compiled the insults that have been hurled at pro-lifers by Father Rosica in person or through his website.  Note: these criticisms are not solely addressed to LifeSite; the vast majority are directed towards the pro-life movement in general.

• [LifeSite] is doing "the work of Satan" 
• "something is terribly wrong in the pro-life movement." 
• "Civility, charity, mercy and politeness seem to have dropped out of the pro-life lexicon."
• "Their words and actions vitiate their efforts in favor of life." 
• "not agents of life, but of division, destruction, hatred, vitriol, judgment and violence." 
• "I question whether or not they belong to the Catholic Church. Are such people Catholic?"
  
• "make the Church and our efforts for life look ridiculous and terribly anti-Christian."
• "deep-seated anger and hostility"
• "Through vicious attacks launched on blogs, a new form of self-righteousness, condemnation and gnosticism reveals authors who behave as little children bullying one another around in schoolyards- casting stones, calling names, and wreaking havoc in the Church today!"
• "Sowing seeds of hatred and division are not the work of those who wish to build a culture of life."
• "contribute to the misery and division within the world and the Church"
• "destroy and kill others along the way."
• "very strong, antagonist approach"
• "hostility towards women who would choose abortion"
• "pushing their ideals onto the rest of society"
• "judgmental instead of helpful and supportive"
• "radical" 
• "cruel and hateful individuals"
• "so shrill, so angry and judgmental"
• "ugly and threatening" 
• "this is how the devil triumphs"
• "character assassination"
• "[LifeSite] is not credible, it does not speak for the Church, it is not ethical, it is not honest"
• "wreaking division and havoc"
• [LifeSite] is not an authentic instrument at the service of unity and at the service of the Church. It is causing division. For the 1/10 of kernel of truth that they purport to uncover (and there is truth in what they do) 9/10 is exaggeration."
• "[LifeSite] is bombastic, it is derisive and it is divisive."
• "pit people against each other"
• "wanting to set up a parallel Church"
• "cast aspersions or to dismiss or discredit what the bishops are trying to do" 

I feel so despised, disdained and derided.

Read here for the Vatican's view of how the Kennedy funeral should have been handled.  You'll see that it confirms everything that pro-lifers have been saying and contradicts what Fr. Rosica has been saying.

The oddest thing about this episode, is that Father Rosica did exactly what he was reproaching pro-lifers:  he openly criticized his fellow Catholics and he used such seething and inflammatory language as I have never seen used against pro-lifers, not even by the pro-abortion lobby.

This proves an important point:  his criticism of criticism is a hoax, a smoke-screen.  He himself realizes that constructive criticism is an integral part of Catholicism.  It's technically called "admonishing the sinner" and it is essential for the salvation of souls that have gone astray.

Unfortunately, Fr. Rosica has a distorted view of Catholicism.  But you will rarely hear him saying something overtly anti-Catholic.  He has a history of saying the right things (e.g. "I am pro-life"), but he tends to be unwilling to "take up his cross" by putting his reputation on the line in defending Church teachings.  For example, when he interviewed Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty, an infamous pro-abortion "Catholic", he remained silent while McGuinty expressed his disagreement with Church teaching on same-sex marriage. All this was broadcast on Salt and Light TV.  Is that Fr. Rosica's idea of good Catholic programming?  Contrast this to the beautiful witness of John Pacheco and David MacDonald who, in the last two elections, ran against Dalton McGuinty and publicly rebuked him for his anti-family positions.  Now that's heroic virtue.

To read more about the Fr. Rosica controversy, please visit Socon or Bust here and here. 

I agree with Fr. Rosica on one important point:  the Church is indeed divided.  The fracture is between those who want to follow the Vatican and those who have invented a lovey-dovey Catholicism (such as Fr. Rosica) where the primary goal is to never contradict anybody, even if they're dead wrong and rotting in mortal sin. Passivity can lead to complacency, which is often abused by ill-willed politicians and others.

This isn't about pro-lifers being self-righteous.  Just open up the Bible or the Catechism, or listen to the Vatican's statements.  We're simply trying to obey the Truth as it was handed down over the centuries, not invent our own path.

Please pray for Fr. Rosica. 

Summary of the Development and Peace scandal

In case you missed it, Development and Peace (the official charity of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops) was caught financing organizations in developing countries that advocate for abortion and contraception.  Here is a summary of everything you need to know.

On March 12, 2009, LifeSiteNews.com (a non-profit news service focusing on life and family issues) revealed that Development and Peace was funding five groups in Mexico that were pressuring the Mexican government to legalize abortion. Less than a week later, the National Catholic Register discovered that Development and Peace was funding a pro-abortion group in Bolivia. Over the following months, further investigations into Development and Peace's partners were carried out by various pro-life groups, led by LifeSiteNews.com and Catholic blogger John Pacheco, the main author of Socon or Bust. By June 22, 2009, LifeSiteNews had identified 19 pro-abortion groups being funded by Development and Peace. On July 24, 2009, the tally from Socon or Bust reached 40 pro-abortion and anti-family groups.

During this period, several prominent pro-life groups expressed concerns about these revelations. The most authoritative statement came from the Bishops' Conference of Peru in a letter addressed to Archbishop James Weisgerber, president of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB). After listing three partners of Development and Peace that are promoting abortion in their country, the Peruvian bishops stated:

“In that sense, we respectfully would like to formally request that the funding for the pro-abortion groups in Peru by the Canadian Catholic Organization for Development and Peace be halted. 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."

Other prominent groups to speak out against Development and Peace included Priests for Life Canada, Canadian Catholic author Michael O'Brien, the B.C. Catholic newspaper, American Life League, Catholic Insight magazine, the Population Research Institute, Human Life International (HLI), the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute (CFAM) and the Latin American Alliance for the Family (ALAFA).

Response by Development and Peace and the CCCB

On March 13, 2009, the day after the initial evidence was revealed, the Executive Director of Development and Peace, Michael Casey, issued a note denying that the organization supported any partners or projects that violated Church teaching. However, Casey did not address or disprove any of the evidence presented by LifeSiteNews. Similar statements were published by Development and Peace in the subsequent weeks, but none ever addressed or disproved the growing body of evidence.

Archbishop Thomas Collins (Toronto) was the first Canadian bishop to publicly respond to the controversy. On March 18, 2009, he announced that no donations from his Archdiocese would be forwarded to Development and Peace until an investigation was completed. In the following days, the bishops of Peterborough, Kingston and Vancouver made similar announcements.

On March 20, the president of the CCCB, Archbishop James Weisgerber (Winnipeg) issued a letter stating the matter was being "carefully looked into". On April 8, the CCCB announced that it would conduct an investigation, with the assistance of Development and Peace, into the initial allegations regarding the five Mexican groups only. The report of this investigation was released on June 28 and concluded that the allegations made by LifeSiteNews and other pro-life groups were "not founded on the facts". Despite this sweeping statement, the CCCB's report did not address or disprove any of the evidence presented against the five Mexican groups, nor did it address any of the evidence presented against dozens of other partners of Development and Peace. The report also called for the organization to exercise greater vigilance in selecting its partners (although no specific guidance was provided) and that it foster better relations with the CCCB and with the local bishops in the countries in which it operates. Finally, the report reaffirmed the bishops' belief in the dignity of human life from conception to natural death.

Throughout the controversy, Archbishop Weisgerber argued that it was morally licit for Development and Peace to fund organizations that were in opposition to Church teaching, a point that caused much consternation among Catholics. To support his point, the Archbishop incorrectly claimed that the Vatican was providing funds to UNICEF despite disagreements over issues such as contraception and abortion. In reality, the Vatican had announced in 1996 that it would stop donating to UNICEF precisely because it was promoting abortion and contraception. This ban remains in effect today.

Distrust remains over Development and Peace

Given the lack of attention to the evidence, the CCCB's report does not appear to have reassured pro-life Catholics. On July 23, 2009, Archbishop Collins (Toronto), who had been withholding donations from his Archdiocese, announced that donations from Toronto would only be directed to partners of Development and Peace that were endorsed by the local bishop. He also called for a comprehensive review of Development and Peace during the coming year, guided by two key principles: 1) that Development and Peace only work with partners that are in harmony with the Catholic faith; 2) that Development and Peace obtain approval of the local bishops before funding any projects. Archbishop Collins also added that future donations from his Archdiocese would depend on the extent to which the issues of concern had been resolved. The same week, Archbishop Miller of Vancouver, who had also been withholding donations, announced that he strongly supports the steps taken by the Archdiocese of Toronto in order to prevent future controversies.

The editorial staff at LifeSiteNews also reacted to the CCCB's report by publishing a response in which they call the report a "whitewash". Similarly, Socon or Bust published a four-part rebuttal to the CCCB's report.

The CCCB is scheduled to discuss the matter further at their plenary assembly in October 2009.

Fearing for our freedom of speech

As you know, Father Rosica has spent the better part of the last two weeks doing a tour of Catholic media outlets in order to criticize pro-lifers and discredit Internet news sources and blogs. I don't claim to know what he or the CCCB are thinking. Nor will I attempt to make a judgment of their intentions. However, I am entitled to express my feelings.

I feel scared. Very scared. And you should too. I feel that our freedom of expression is at risk.

We've just learned that the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB) has hired two former MPs and two communications experts in order to revamp their communications strategy. At the same time, we've learned that the plenary assembly of the CCCB, which will take place in October, includes a session to discuss Internet news services and blogs. All this comes on the heels of the Development and Peace (D&P) scandal, which was a source of great embarrassment for the bishops and in which Internet news services and blogs played a pivotal role in revealing D&P’s support for about 40 pro-abortion groups throughout the developing world.

Are you seeing a connection?

While Father Rosica was vehemently criticizing us bloggers, I felt rejected. I felt as though our presence was not wanted. I felt most unwelcome to express any views that opposed the actions or statements of the bishops or of Father Rosica himself. I felt like I was something despised or base.

Justifiable outrage

In recent weeks, Father Thomas Rosica, Director of Salt&Light TV, has been pointing his guns in the wrong direction.  He has been aggressively attacking pro-lifers for using language that he deems to be too strong.  He advocates a soft, wishy-washy, lovey-dovey Christianity who's first commandment is "Thou shalt not ruffle any feathers".  (I'll have more info on Fr. Rosica in another post). 

Well, Fr. Rosica, I encourage you to watch the video posted here.  Once you've seen who we're up against, I hope you'll excuse us if sometimes we get a little upset.  In fact, we must get upset, as we read in St. Thomas Aquinas' Summa Theologica (quotes were ascribed to St. John Chrysostom):

"He who is not angry, whereas he has cause to be, sins. For unreasonable patience is the hotbed of many vices, it fosters negligence, and incites not only the wicked but the good to do wrong." 

"He that is angry without cause, shall be in danger; but he that is angry with cause, shall not be in danger: for without anger, teaching will be useless, judgments unstable, crimes unchecked."  Therefore to be angry is not always an evil.  (Source)