Wonderful action by the Bishop of Green Bay

Here!  Here!  Thank you Bishop David Ricken for suspending your diocese's collection to the CCHD, which is funneling money to groups that support abortion and same-sex marriage!

We could use more of this from our Canadian bishops.  So far, only three Canadian bishops have decided to withhold Lenten donations from Development and Peace, according to this useful website.  There are more than 60 dioceses in the Latin rite in Canada.

Toronto Archdiocese Renews Funding Restrictions on Development and Peace

Finally some good news on the D&P scandal, again from Archbishop Thomas Collins of Toronto.  Last year, when the D&P scandal broke, he was the first to announce that no money from his Archdiocese would be sent to a D&P partner unless the partner was approved by the local bishop in the country where the operation was to take place.

He has just now reiterated this position.  Read the coverage here. 

This type of leadership is exactly what the Canadian Church needs.  Here's a man who is rising up to receive the grace of courage being offered by God to His bishops.  He refuses to be complicit in D&P's devious ruse and he's not afraid to announce it publicly, thus avoiding scandal among his flock.  He will not be bullied by his brother bishops.  He is clearly showing the Catholics of Toronto and of the whole country that he will not tolerate funding being send to anti-Church groups.

May God bless you, Archbishop Collins.  Your Grace, we are at your disposal should you ever need us to help bring change to D&P.  Just say the word and we'll come running.  

May this good bishop inspire the other timid bishops in this country to rise up to the full measure of Christ.

.

Do we really need the CCCB?

Everything said in this video about the lack of authority of the USCCB applies to the CCCB.  So why bother with a national bishops conference?  We certainly need bishops, but do we need national conferences that pretend to be their own magisterium that can oppose Rome? 


.

Corruption at USCCB worse than anyone thought

Right up there with the CCCB.

Ignatieff supports D&P-style of pro-abortion international aid

Michael Ignatieff, the leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, has stepped up his attacks against Prime Minister Stephen Harper on the most bizarre of fronts:  he insists that Harper's initiative to help maternal and child health in developing countries must include abortion services and contraception. 

Ignatieff's position doesn't surprise me one bit, since he's always been pro-abort and pro-homosexuality.  That's what the Liberal Party is all about.  What is interesting is that this model of development is identical to the model espoused by Development and Peace and the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops.  As the evidence has shown, D&P and the CCCB are supporting more than 40 groups in developing countries that promote abortion and contraception.  

So D&P and our bishops are of the same mind as Ignatieff:  any time you

A second D&P partner supports new abortion policy in Brazil

A few days ago, I reported that one of Development and Peace's (D&P) partners in Brazil had publicly endorsed the government's proposed policy that would make abortion a human right and would greatly advance the homosexualist agenda. They also publicly rebuked the Brazilian Catholic Church for requesting amendments to this policy.  Read about it here.

I've now learned that a second D&P partner in Brazil called Movimento de Mulheres Camponesas (MMC) has also publicly and unconditionally endorsed this policy.  Their article entitled "Who's afraid of human rights?" supports the complete and integral implementation of the policy, which has been widely criticized by the Catholic Church in Brazil.  The article also makes a veiled rebuke of the Catholic Church by criticizing "conservative sectors" of society that have made "unfounded criticisms" of the policy.  You can read MMC's article in Portuguese here.

So we now have two partners of Development and Peace that are supporting a pro-abortion and pro-homosexual policy while publicly rebuking the Brazilian Catholic Church.

This is crunch time for the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB).  As we are now witnessing, the D&P scandal is not some abstract or theoretical debate.  D&P's partners are contributing to the imminent legalization of abortion in Brazil.  We are witnessing this process live, right before our eyes.  This will have real and bloody consequences for Brazilians and their unborn babies very, very soon.

Are there any bishops in Canada that give a damn?  How can they sleep at night knowing that they will have been complicit in legalizing abortion in the world's largest Catholic country?  Is there any bishop left who will rise up and defend the unborn?

Your Graces, I'm sure you have many excuses for your inaction.  

Maybe you think that you did your part when you wrote some pastoral letter or gave a homily on abortion a few years ago.  Unfortunately, that's not even close to being enough.  It's relatively easy to write a beautiful letter and post it on your diocesan website where nobody will read it. 

Or perhaps you think that one man acting alone cannot make a difference when the majority of bishops are supportive of Development and Peace. 

Or maybe you think that it wouldn't look good to break ranks with your brother bishops, as if the image of unity projected by the CCCB supersedes the Truth of the Gospel.  Do you think that it's more important to exhibit a common front than to prevent the slaughter of thousands of innocent babes?  Do you think your distorted notion of episcopal solidarity excuses you from fulfilling the obligations of your sacred office?

I'm sure you have no shortage of rationalizations to justify your inaction.  But they all boil down to cowardice or ignorance of what God is really expecting from you.  How can you possibly claim to be pro-life when with one hand you're writing a letter against abortion but with the other hand you writing cheques to advance abortion in the Global South?

I understand that it's not easy to fight against the establishment.  It's much easier to keep quiet on watch the hockey game on Saturday night.  But don't forget that you were given a special grace from the Holy Spirit when you were elevated to the rank of bishop.  You've been endowed with the same gift of the Spirit that was granted to the Apostles.  You are capable of breaking the code of silence being imposed by corrupt bishops.  God has given you all the graces you need.  It's up to you to muster enough testosterone to take a stand. 


If you fulfill your duty, you will find that God will support you and give you strength and consolation.  You'll also find that many Catholics will rally behind you.  We will love you for your courageous stand.  We will support you in whatever means you request -- publicly or privately, through prayer or through works, financially or otherwise -- in order to bring change to D&P.  We will be humble and loving servants at your disposal, eager to lend a hand.  You won't be alone.

So what will it be?  On the day of your death, what will you say to Almighty God while He is surrounded by the souls of the aborted babies who never had a chance to live because of D&P?



************************************

I invite all readers to join me in a prayer for bishops:

Heavenly Father,
In these difficult times when the spirit of the age threatens Christian values, grant to all bishops holiness of life
and wisdom to proclaim the Gospel with faithfulness, boldness and charity, so that humanity may grow closer to You.
We ask this through Christ our Lord.
Amen.

.

D&P partner supports new abortion policy in Brazil

In case you haven't heard, our brethren in Brazil are facing a tough battle over a new government policy proposal.  Here's a quick overview:

Brazilian President Luiz Lula da Silva has introduced a massive legislative reform package in the last year of his term that would secure abortion as a "human right," impose socialist and homosexualist ideology in the schools and media, and ban crucifixes from government facilities, among other measures.

The legislative program, which is called the Third National Program for Human Rights (PNDH-3), would establish a level of control over the media and private property that is being called a nonviolent "coup d'etat" and a socialist party "dictatorship." It has elicited widespread protest from institutions ranging from the Catholic Church to military leaders, the agricultural sector, and even members of the president's own cabinet.

The leadership of the National Conference of Brazilian Bishops (CNBB) has issued a declaration "reaffirming its position, manifested many times, in defense of life and the family, and against the decriminalization of abortion, against marriage between people of the same sex and the right of adoption of children by homosexual couples."

The CNBB leadership "also rejects the creation of 'mechanisms to impede the display of religious symbols in public establishments of the Union,' because it regards such an intolerant measure as ignoring our historical roots." (Source)

Development and Peace (D&P), the official charity for pro-choice Catholics and wishy-washy bishops (or OCPCCWWB for short), funds three partners in Brazil. One of them is called FASE (Federação de Órgãos para Assistência Social e

CCCB pro-life promises: taking stock after 2 months

As I reported in an earlier post, the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB) made some commitments at the end of the Plenary Assembly, on October 23rd, to be more active in promoting a respect for life.  That's great news.  This is badly needed.

It has now been two months since that commitment.  So far, we haven't seen any action.  But there was some movement.  Kinda.  On December 9th, the Permanent Council of the CCCB appointed three bishops to an ad hoc Committee on Life and Family.  The three bishops are CCCB Vice President Archbishop Richard Smith (Edmonton), Bishop Ronald P. Fabbro (London) and Auxiliary Bishop Gérald C. Lacroix (Quebec City).  The CCCB had this to say about the Committee in a press release:

Its mandate is to develop an intermediate and long-term strategy for the promotion of a culture of life and family in Canada and to submit a proposal to the Permanent Council before the 2010 Plenary.

This is somewhat underwhelming. There are a few disturbing issues about this approach:

• Sadly, the solution requires another committee.  More bureaucracy, I'm afraid.  I can't say that I'm surprised, however. 
  
• The Committee will submit a proposal before the 2010 Plenary.  They're not implementing the strategy by the 2010 Plenary.  Just formulating a proposal.  The 2010 Plenary is likely to be held in the fall of 2010.  The bishops will likely discuss the proposal at that time, maybe make some amendments and, if we're lucky, give the go-ahead to the actual launch of the strategy, which may not be visible to ordinary

Did "Liberating Potential" undo the dissent of the Winnipeg Statement?

In September 2008, the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB) issued a document called "Liberating Potential". The document was issued to commemorate the 40th anniversary of the encyclical Humanae Vitae. Liberating Potential is an excellent document that speaks about the greatness of the gift of sexuality and the fact that contraception and abortion are incompatible with God's plan for life. The document is very robust and doesn't contain any trace of dissent.  It is everything you would hope to see from the pen of our bishops.

I applaud the bishops for having issued this document. It was badly needed.

Given that "Liberating Potential" is in agreement with the Church's teaching on contraception, it is legitimate to ask the question as to whether this nullifies the Winnipeg Statement. In other words, did the assent in "Liberating Potential" undo the dissent of the Winnipeg Statement?  I don't think so. In my opinion, it was a good first step, but it doesn't go far enough. Let me explain why.

When the average Joe like you or me commits a sin, God requires several steps in order for us to be forgiven:

1.  We must admit our wrongdoing.
2.  We must be sorry for having offended God and others.
3.  We must change our behavior and make a firm resolve to not commit that sin again.

I think that the bishops need to be held to the same standard when it comes to the Winnipeg Statement. So let's see if Liberating Potential lives up to this standard.

1.  Admitting their wrongdoing

Have the bishops admitted the error of the Winnipeg Statement and all the erroneous pastoral actions that flowed from it over 40 years?  No.
Has there has been any admission of guilt and of the huge damage done over the last four decades?  No. 

Now someone might claim that the bishops may have privately repented of the Winnipeg Statement. That's certainly a possibility. However, bishops should know that a public sin requires a public repentance, as was

The truth about priests

Here is an excellent article published on MacLean's web site. I found it very balanced and down to earth. It talks about the horrible sexual abuses committed by too many priests over the years. It offers a very compassionate discussion of the immense suffering that the victims have undergone. It sympathizes with the contempt that good priests now have to face because of the sins of their brothers. But the article points to a truth that is too often overlooked and that needs to be repeated:

But at the risk of downplaying decades of unspeakable abuse—or forgiving a Church hierarchy that moved heaven and earth to suppress scandal and protect criminal clergy—an obvious point is often ignored: the vast, vast majority of Catholic priests are not sexual predators. In fact, the scientific research suggests that men who target children are no more pervasive in the priesthood (and perhaps less pervasive) than in any other segment of society. Depending on the study, somewhere between two and four per cent of priests have had sexual contact with a minor. Or, to put it another way, between 96 and 98 per cent have not.

“It’s part of that myth—the myth of the pedophile priest who can’t help himself,” says Thomas Plante, a psychology professor at Santa Clara University who has published dozens of studies about sexually abusive priests. “It’s really an issue of perception rather than reality. Believe it or not, probably the safest place for a kid to be is in a Catholic church environment.”

My only reservation with this article is that it tends to use the term "pedophile" to describe these priests who abuse children. Later they say that a more accurate term would be "ephebophiles,": which means "people

Clarifications on "early inductions"

A few days ago, I wrote a post regarding the unethical practice of "early inductions".  I would like to clarify something.  I will also add this new information to the original post.

There exist some rare conditions where it may be necessary to remove the membranes that surround the unborn baby because these membranes have become diseased and could result in the death of the mother (and, of course, of the baby).  For example: 

• Chorioamnionitis is an inflammation of the amnion and chorion membranes that surround the baby due to a bacterial infection.  The amniotic fluid typically gets infected too. If left untreated, both the mother and baby could die.  Apparently, antibiotics are not sufficient to fix the problem.  As a result, it is necessary to take out those membranes and the amniotic fluid from the mother.  Of course, since the baby is inside those fluids, the baby comes out at the same time.

• Pre-eclampsia is a dangerous condition that  leads to high blood pressure, high protein levels in the blood and seizures in the most severe cases (this is not an exhaustive list of symptoms).  This condition is potentially fatal for the mother and baby.  While the cause is not known, some theorize that it may be due to problems with the placenta.  Medication can be used to treat the moderate cases, but the most severe cases appear to be resolved only by removal of the placenta, which takes the baby out.

I've chosen my words carefully because I'm making a direct reference to the principle of double-effect. In these two cases, you will notice that it's not the baby that is killing the mother. It's the "stuff" that surrounds the baby

ClimateGate: the fraud of global warming is finally unmasked

If you've been following the mainstream media lately, the odds are good that you haven't heard of this scandal because most people in the media are left-leaning environmentalists who won't let the truth get in the way of a good story.

Here's what happened: some hackers managed to break into the computer systems at the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia in Britain. They discovered thousands of emails and documents that climate "experts" have been sending to each other for more than 10 years. All this info is now posted on the web. You're welcome to search through it yourself. Although it's taking time to sift through all these emails, many startling revelations have come to light:

• Scientists admitting to manipulating the data in order to prove that the Earth is warming.
• Scientists preventing research that disproves global warming from ever getting published.
• Scientists deleting emails to cover their tracks.
  

The New York Times has confirmed that these emails are authentic.

As governments from around the world prepare for an upcoming climate change conference in Copenhagen, I think you are entitled to know what's really going on. This article from the National Post provides some juicy quotes. The video below is also excellent.

Another great witness by Bishop Tobin on denying communion

Watch the video below.  Some very courageous and bold statements by the bishop, yet very balanced and charitable.  Bravo to Bishop Tobin!

I wish our bishops and priests would step up to the plate and follow this example. In fact, it is their obligation to do so, because the Vatican has spoken clearly on this matter several times in the last few years. The most explicit document was a letter written by Cardinal Ratzinger in 2004, a year before he became Pope.  It's a short letter but very rich in teaching about a number of important issues.  Paragraphs 5 and 6 are so explicit on this issue that even a child would grasp them:

5.  Regarding the grave sin of abortion or euthanasia, when a person’s formal cooperation becomes manifest (understood, in the case of a Catholic politician, as his consistently campaigning and voting for permissive abortion and euthanasia laws), his Pastor should meet with him, instructing him about the Church’s teaching, informing him that he is not to present himself for Holy Communion until he brings to an end the objective situation of sin, and warning him that he will otherwise be denied the Eucharist.

 6. When "these precautionary measures have not had their effect or in which they were not possible," and the person in question, with obstinate persistence, still presents himself to receive

The moral problem with "early inductions" at St. Joseph's Catholic Hospital

Following an earlier post of mine on the scandalous "early inductions" at St. Joseph's Catholic Hospital, a very interesting discussion ensued in the comments section. This post is a synthesis of why I believe that the procedures at St. Joseph's are not morally acceptable.


What is happening at St. Joseph's

Before starting my explanation, I'll just repeat what exactly is happening at St. Joseph's: 

1. A prenatal diagnosis test reveals a baby has serious birth defects.
2. The doctors conclude that the mother is in some physical, psychological or psychiatric danger because of the baby's defect.
3. Doctors wait until the baby reaches 21 weeks of gestation, the point at which it is considered "viable", in other words that it could theoretically survive outside the womb if it were given highly specialized intensive care treatment.
4. The doctors then artificially induce labour so that the baby is born prematurely.
5. They intentionally let the baby die.  They only provide palliative care to the dying baby. 

Why this is morally unacceptable

In this section I'll explain why this practice is so horrible.  Not only are St. Joseph's official guidelines - as written on paper - morally unacceptable, but their application is even worse because they're terminating babies when the mother's health isn't even in danger.

In the 5-point description above of what happens at St. Joseph's, you'll notice that the baby does not die of its deformity.  It dies due to prematurity.  Heck, even a perfectly healthy baby delivered at 21 weeks would not survive

Bishop Henry rips bill C-484 but ignores euthanasia committed under Bishop Fabbro's nose

As reported by Michael at Freedom Through Truth, Bishop Fred Henry of Calgary has sent a letter to Fr. Tim Moyle regarding bill C-484.  It is a very good letter and I applaud Bishop Henry for this strong pro-life effort.  

I am unaware if this letter has been distributed more widely through the media or throughout the Calgary diocese.  It would certainly be worthwhile.  

One paragraph of the letter caught my attention:

The legislation of aid-in-dying would pose a threat to the elderly, the infirm, handicapped newborns and to all members of society who are unable to look after their own best interests. This kind of legislation says to them: "you're not important; you're not needed; in fact, you are a burden to others.

That's an excellent point.  We need to hear this more often.  

It's funny he should mention "newborns", because one of his fellow bishops, Ronald Fabbro (London),  oversees

Catholic priest speaks boldly about bishops who cover up sex abuse scandals

A powerful yet simple message by Fr. Tim Moyle at Where the Rubber Hits the Road.  A reader asked him why bishops cover up sex abuse scandals by priests.  Read Fr. Tim's answer here.  Well said!

Does this repulse you?

Let me show you a couple of recent headlines from the secular media. First, from the CBC: 

Life sentence in 30-year-old Longueuil murder

A 61-year-old Longeuil woman has been sentenced to life in prison for the first-degree murder of her sister and her sister's partner in August 1979... (Source)

Do you find that headline offensive?  Does it make you feel that the Quebec authorities are too strict and grumpy?  I didn't think so.  Grave crimes require grave punishment, right?  Let's try another headline from the UK:

Ben’s law: Knife murder minimum sentence raised to 25 yrs after Kinsella campaign

Knife killers will spend up to a decade longer in jail after a successful campaign by the family of victim Ben Kinsella. Justice Secretary Jack Straw announced the tougher new penalties yesterday. It means a minimum sentence in most cases increasing from 15 to 25 years – just five below the 30-year term for gun murder... (Source)

Does that headline scare you? Does it make you feel like the authorities in the U.K. are mean or negative people?  No?  Me neither. Murder is serious business and requires a serious penalty.

So what's my point?  You might be asking yourself what I've been smoking. Let me show you a third headline:

Spanish Bishop Says Catholic Politicians Who Vote for Abortion Excommunicate Themselves

The secretary general of the Spanish bishops' conference, Auxiliary Bishop Juan Antonio Martinez Camino of Madrid, warned that Spanish Catholic legislators who vote in favor

Is money all that matters to the CCCB regarding Development and Peace?

John Pacheco at SoCon or Bust just wrote another insightful article on the Development and Peace (D&P) scandal.  Click here to read it.

Media reports following the Plenary of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB) had some coverage of the D&P affair, although we really don't know what happened because all the important discussions were held behind closed doors.

Among the public comments that we know of, Bishop Richard Grecco (Charlottetown) presented a report that whitewashed D&P of any wrongdoing. That part isn't surprising.  What shocked me was the report's assessment of the toll that this scandal has taken:

"Among the individual and regular monthly donors to DEVELOPMENT AND PEACE, we have had 34 individuals (of our 6,110 donors) cancel their monthly contributions as a direct result of the controversy, representing 0.5% of our donor database." (Source)

The reason that donations were so little affected is partly due to the fact that most pro-life Catholics stopped donating to D&P years ago because of other scandals.  

But there is a more fundamental issue here.  Is that how Catholic bishops should assess a controversy, by its financial cost?  

What about the sufferings of thousands of faithful Catholics that have become disillusioned and

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,

CCCB covers up damning D&P evidence; Archbishop admits his apathy

LifeSiteNews.com interviewed Archbishop Martin Currie of St. John's, Newfoundland, regarding the Development and Peace (D&P) scandal. Archbishop Currie was listed as a co-author of the June 2009 report of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB) that whitewashed the D&P scandal. Look what happened during the interview:

The June report sparked controversy as it stated: "we believe the allegations by Lifesite News … are not founded on the facts."  In the interview however, LSN was able to demonstrate directly to the archbishop that the allegations were indeed founded on facts.  After seeing the evidence first hand, the bishop stated apologetically, "I just should have followed up more."

Hold on a sec. The whole purpose of the CCCB's so-called investigation into D&P was to "follow up more" on the allegations. It seems that the archbishop was grossly negligent in how he conducted his "investigation". Negligent probably isn't strong enough of a word. After all, John Pacheco mailed the evidence directly to each bishop in the country.  All they had to do was open the envelope and read the contents.  It was served to them on a silver platter.  Hand-fed into their mouths with a spoon.

It makes my blood boil. We're talking about abortion! This isn't some trivial theologian debate about how many angels can stand on the head of a needle. Lives are at stake!  What does it take to get a bishop to bounce out of his chair in outrage? 

Let's read more:

He explained that the investigation was limited to the first five groups in Mexico that LSN had