European unity tested over crucifixes in classroom

By VICTOR L. SIMPSON
(AP)
July 2, 2010

ROME — An emotional debate over crucifixes in classrooms is opening a new crack in European unity.

It all started in a small town in northern Italy, where Finnish-born Soile Lautsi was so shocked by the sight of crosses above the blackboard in her children's public school classroom that she called a lawyer to see if she could get them removed.

Her case went all the way to Europe's highest court — and her victory has set up a major confrontation between traditional Catholic and Orthodox countries and nations in the north that observe a strict separation between church and state. Italy and more than a dozen other countries are fighting the European Court of Human Rights ruling, contending the crucifix is a symbol of the continent's historic and cultural roots.

"This is a great battle for the freedom and identity of our Christian values," said Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini.

The court case underlines how religious symbols are becoming a contentious issue in an increasingly multiethnic Europe.

French legislators begin debate next week on a draft law, vigorously championed by President Nicolas Sakorzy, that would forbid women from wearing face-covering Islamic veils anywhere in public. Belgium and Spain are considering similar laws.

In its Nov. 3 ruling, the European Court of Human Rights accepted Lautsi's contention that a crucifix could be disturbing to non-Christian pupils and said state-run schools must observe "confessional neutrality." Rulings of the court are binding on the 47 members of the Council of Europe, Europe's chief human rights watchdog.

Crucifixes are on display in many public buildings in Italy, where the Vatican is located, and the Roman Catholic Church has encouraged support for keeping them. They will be taken down in schools, however, if the court ruling stands.

Despite the rhetoric, Italy has given no hint that the issue would be enough to compel it to quit the council, something no country has ever done.

Arguing the appeal Wednesday, New York University legal scholar Joseph Weiler stressed the importance of national symbols "around which society can coalesce."

"It would be strange (if Italy) had to abandon national symbols, and strip from its cultural identikit any symbol which also had a religious significance," said Weiler, an Orthodox Jew who wore a yarmulke while addressing the 19-judge panel.

Taken to the extreme, Weiler elaborated in an interview with Italy's La Stampa newspaper, the case for secularism could endanger Britain's national anthem "God Save the Queen."

Lined up with Italy are such traditional Catholic bastions as Malta, San Marino and Lithuania. The Foreign Ministry of the late Pope John Paul II's Poland — where crucifixes are displayed in public schools and even in the hall of parliament — says the country "supports all actions that the government of Italy has taken before the Council of Europe."

The list also includes such heavily Orthodox Christian countries as Greece and Cyprus, as well as Russia, Ukraine and Bulgaria, which lived through religious persecution under communism.

"The support from so many other countries — we are talking here about a third of the membership of the Council of Europe — has given the case great political significance," said Gregor Puppinck, director of the European Center for Law and Justice, a Christian lobbying group.

A final ruling is not expected before fall. Lautsi filed the first complaint in 2002, and both her children are now in their early 20s.

The debate over the role religion should play on the largely secular continent has been simmering for more than a decade.

For years, Pope John Paul called on the European Union to include a reference to the continent's Judeo-Christian heritage in a new constitution, lecturing European leaders whenever they came to Rome. But France and other northern countries blocked such wording.

John Paul's successor, Pope Benedict XVI, urged Europeans to defend their continent's religious and cultural heritage just a week after the November verdict on crucifixes.

Benedict has held up the United States as an example, saying he admires "the American people's historic appreciation of the role of religion in shaping public discourse." The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in favor of government displays of religious materials such as the Ten Commandments when their purpose was educational or historical rather than religious.

Some Muslims in Europe see supporters of crucifixes in classrooms as applying a double standard to religious tolerance.

Said Bouamama, a Muslim sociologist and specialist in immigration questions in France, says the push by Italy and other nations "reflects a clear preference for Christianity, meaning that tolerance is only extended towards one religion and not for all."

Such a measure must be "either for everyone or for no one. If not, it will produce even greater division," said Bouamama, a researcher at a French institute that trains social workers.

France has western Europe's largest Muslim population, about 5 million, and largest Jewish population, about half a million. Its generally moderate Muslim community has shown itself reluctant to pursue court action in cases involving clothing issues, as when France barred Muslim headscarves from classrooms in 2004.

AP correspondents Robert Wielaard in Brussels, Angela Charlton and Rafael Mesquita in Paris, Monika Scislowska in Warsaw and Jim Heintz in Moscow contributed to this report.

Pro-Abort Catholic: Women Should Feel 'Guilty' if They Don't Abort Inconvenient Child

By Kathleen Gilbert

WASHINGTON, D.C., June 30, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Proponents of feminism within a religious tradition play a crucial role in subverting "religious fundamentalism" in Catholicism, according to a member of the pro-abortion group Catholics for the Right to Decide.

Elfriede Harth, Secretariat of European Parliament Study Group on Religion and Secularity and a Spanish member of Catholics for the Right to Decide (whose U.S. partner is Catholics for Choice), made the remarks at this month's Women Deliver conference in Washington, D.C.

The conference was largely a push for population control in developing countries worldwide through contraception and abortion funding.

Harth named the orthodox Catholic movement Opus Dei as a formidable opponent to Catholics attempting to promote liberal doctrines within the Church, and said that religious feminists should work to "analyze and demystify religious fundamentalism."

"Religious feminist(s) play a crucial role in organizing resistance to religious fundamentalism," said Harth.

But perhaps more revealing were Harth's subsequent comments during a discussion with audience members following the breakout session. There, Harth discussed her group's conflict with the Church hierarchy over the use of the name "Catholic," admitting that "they don't like us at all."

"They're always trying to say we're not real Catholics, which is wrong, because the criterion to say you're Catholic is that you're baptized. That's all," she said. "And I don't accept that other people pretend that they define what is Catholicism. You know? The way the Vatican presents Catholicism is incomplete." She went on to claim that the Church suppresses discussion of "freedom of conscience" because the hierarchy is "so afraid that the institution breaks down."

On the topic of abortion, Harth called it "not true" that legislators who vote for abortion laws are excommunicated from the Church. "'Oh, legislators who vote for abortion laws they are excommunicated,' [according to some bishops,] but then when you go and tell them that's not true, then they have to retract. 'Oh yeah, you're right,'" she said.

According to Catholic moral teaching, substantial material cooperation in an intrinsic evil merits the punishment accorded to the deed itself; in addition, Section 915 of the Catholic Church's Canon Law states that those persisting in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to Holy Communion. Because of this rule, Archbishop Raymond Burke, the head of the Vatican's highest court, has repeatedly admonished bishops that pro-abortion politicians must be denied Communion.

Ultimately, said Harth, a woman has a right to abort because she "has a right to have a good life" and she does not have "the right to ruin it." "And if a pregnancy is going to ruin her life in any way, she has a right to get the abortion. She has the right. She has an obligation to protect her life from being ruined. ... Because you owe this respect to yourself because you're a child of God. You should feel guilty if you don't," she said.

Asked about the unborn child's rights, she answered that the issue was "important" to the choice to abort. "If you have an abortion, there is a fetus that will be killed. No way. This is true. But ... for us, death is not the end of the story," said Harth. "And this unborn child or fetus or whatever you want to call it is ... well, we do not know what God is going to do with this creature. God has a lot of mercy, maybe...we don't know."

Afterwards, one audience member told LifeSiteNews.com that, as a practicing Catholic, she had felt "guilty" about promoting abortion but was reconsidering the matter thanks to Harth's justifications.

American Life League president Judie Brown called the statements "ridiculous," and said Harth's outrageous statements about Church teaching reveal the deficiency of many Catholic bishops in failing firmly to expound the Church's teaching on abortion.

"I think what she's actually telling us as schooled Catholics is that the Church has done a very bad job in teaching precisely what the Church does and does not teach," Brown told LifeSiteNews.com. "There is no person - no human being - who defines what Catholicism is, it's set forth in the Creed, it's set forth in the Catechism, it's set forth by Christ himself."

"And when you choose to disagree with a basic fundamental teaching of the Church, you're not Catholic - no matter what you say you are," she added.

"In essence this woman, Harth, is either totally uncatechized; either that or she's staying within the Church with the expressed purpose of destroying it from within," said Brown, who expressed dismay over the massive scandal given by Harth and other dissident Catholics who convince others to abandon genuine Church teaching.

"In their confusion, they're guiding these souls to Hell - that's exactly what they're doing," she said.


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


A Short Catechism for Pro-Abortion "Catholic" Feminists

Inspired by the LifeSiteNews report above (and too many others like it).

Posted by Carl Olson
Ignatius Insight
Thursday, July 01, 2010


1. Who made us?

God made us, blah, blah, blah. But, more importantly, he/she gives us freedom of conscience, the right to do whatever we wish with our bodies, and mouths to criticize and condemn Church authority. Traditional Catholicism is hung up on telling people, "Repent!" But the New Church is about saying, "Dissent!"

2. Who is God?

Religious fundamentalists such as the pope have created a patriarchal "God" who hates women, hates the freedom of conscience, and who sends people to hell. But the real god/goddess, who is a constantly evolving concept shared by the spiritually enlightened within the global community, is most interested in our happiness, which comes from us deciding to do what we want, which usually involves denouncing the Magisterium and fighting for the right to reproductive health services. The true god/goddess is a friend who tells us what we want to hear, when we want to hear it.

3. Why did God make us?

To have a good life and to create our own happiness, based on tolerance, diversity, egalitarianism, sexual freedom, and liberation from oppressive male institutions. To pursue reproductive justice. And to be lesbian.

4. What must we do to gain the happiness of heaven?

Just be yourself! Reject guilt, hug yourself! Besides, heaven is a traditional construct rooted in fear, violence, and infantile notions of objective morality. True happiness is found in doing what is best for you, on your terms, free of social and religious constraints that are anti-woman and anti-progress. Also, don't accept how the old men in the Vatican present Catholicism. The way the Vatican presents Catholicism is incomplete.

You mustn't let old men tell you how to live your life, or let unborn fetuses ruin your life. Helping women find reproductive justice is one of the greatest acts of social justice you can accomplish. They have a sacred right to abortion, and an obligation to keep their lives from being ruined by pregnancy. After all, the President said it, and that should settle it for anyone living in a democracy.

5. From whom do we learn to know, love, and serve God?

The National Catholic Reporter, Richard McBrien, Mary Daly, The New York Times, Charlie Curran, Joan Chittister, and the Spirit of Vatican II. Oh, and Oprah and "The View". But it's most important to know yourself and love yourself. Affirm who you are by being free of prejudice, dogma, and doctrine. Keep those rosaries off our ovaries!

6. Where do we find the chief truths taught by Jesus Christ through the Catholic Church?

There is no "truth", and that's the truth! But, in addition to the infallible sources mentioned above, the most important source of truth is my conscience, which should not be influenced by Jesus Christ or the Catholic Church.

7. Say the Apostles' Creed.

Get lost! Now you're encroaching on my right to privacy and blurring the line separating church and State. Don't ask me how; I'll have an ACLU lawyer call you and explain it.

Presbyterian leaders approve gay clergy policy

By PATRICK CONDON,
Associated Press Writer
July 8, 2010

MINNEAPOLIS – Presbyterian leaders voted Thursday to allow non-celibate gays in committed relationships to serve as clergy, approving the first of two policy changes that could make their church one of the most gay-friendly major Christian denominations in the U.S.

But the vote isn't a final stamp of approval for the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) or its more than 2 million members.

Delegates voted during the church's general assembly in Minneapolis, with 53 percent approving the more liberal policy on gay clergy. A separate vote is expected later Thursday on whether to change the church's definition of marriage from between "a man and a woman" to between "two people."

Such changes must be approved by a majority of the church's 173 U.S. presbyteries before they can take effect. Two years ago, the assembly voted to liberalize the gay clergy policy — but it died last year when 94 of the presbyteries voted against it.

Under current church policy, Presbyterians are only eligible to become clergy, deacons or elders if they are married or celibate. The new policy would strike references to sexuality altogether in favor of candidates committed to "joyful submission to worship of Christ."

"What this is about is making sure we uphold what Christ taught us, to not judge one another," said Dan Roth, a church elder from Sacramento. "We will no longer have to tell our brothers and sisters in Christ that they lie about who they are."

But critics said the move toward more liberal policy would simply create disputes and bad feelings in Presbyterian churches nationwide.

"If we are once again conflicted with this question in our presbyteries, all the air will be sucked out of the room," said the Rev. William Reid Dalton III of Burlington, N.C. "All the other things, the important issues we need to consider will not considered."

Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) is ranked the 10th-largest church in the U.S. with 2.8 million members, according to the National Council of Churches' 2010 "Yearbook of American and Canadian Churches." The church's media materials tout 2.1 million members.

Several major Christian denominations have voted in recent years to allow non-celibate gays to serve as clergy if they are in committed relationships. Among them are the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the U.S. Episcopal Church and the United Church of Christ.

Benjamin Wind, a nonvoting young adult delegate to the assembly from Syracuse, N.Y., said Presbyterians of his generation greatly favor the change.

"The world has become a more tolerant and accepting place," Wind said. "I've grown up with gay and lesbian friends, teachers, even spiritual leaders. They stand proud as people who deserve the same rights as all human beings."

Leaders of the Presbyterian Renewal Network, a conservative group within the church, said allowing non-celibate gay people to serve as clergy would amount to "removing the moral standard for our ministers."

Other delegates warned that liberalizing such policies would put the Presbyterian church in opposition to its cohorts in other parts of the world, where the denomination is seeing much of its new growth. Delegates also are considering removing the threat of punishment for clergy who perform same-sex marriages in states where it's legal.

"I fear for the partnerships we have built around the globe," said the Rev. D. Matthew Stith, pastor of Community Presbyterian Church in West Fargo, N.D.

Anglican Body Hits Impasse on Women

By JOHN F. BURNS
The New York Times
July 10, 2010

LONDON — The Church of England moved another step closer to an unbridgeable schism between traditionalists and reformers on Saturday when its General Synod, or parliament, rejected a bid by the archbishop of Canterbury to strike a compromise over the ordination of women bishops aimed at preserving the increasingly fragile unity of the worldwide Anglican Communion.

The rejection of proposals aimed at accommodating those who oppose women bishops appeared to strike a serious blow to the authority of the Most Rev. Rowan Williams, whose position as archbishop of Canterbury makes him the spiritual leader of the Communion. Although he has a long-established reputation as a liberal on theological issues, the archbishop, 60, has spent much of his seven years as the Anglican leader seeking to fashion compromises with traditionalists over the role of women and gays as priests and bishops.

But the votes on Saturday appeared to have blocked, perhaps conclusively, a settlement under which hard-line traditionalists might have accepted the appointment of women bishops. The proposals would have provided for a “complementary” male bishop with independent powers, working alongside a woman bishop, to minister to traditionalists unwilling to accept a woman as the head of their diocese.

The narrow rejection of the archbishop’s compromise proposals at the Synod meeting in the northern English city of York appeared to raise the threat of a new wave of defections by traditionalists among the church’s laity and clergy to the Roman Catholic Church. Pope Benedict XVI had responded to the internal divisions among Anglicans last year by offering special provisions for disaffected Anglicans wishing to convert to Catholicism — a move that has led to resentment among some Anglicans.

An earlier wave of defections followed the Church of England’s decision to accept openly gay priests, and moves by the Episcopal Church in the United States to ordain gay bishops.

That led to the offer of special terms for Anglican converts that was made last October by Benedict, and to the shock that was provoked among leading Anglicans, including the archbishop of Canterbury, who saw it as a blow to their efforts to hold Anglicanism together in the face of its deep divisions.

Resentment over the pope’s move has cast a pall over his state visit to Britain in September, which will be the first papal visit to Britain since Pope John Paul II visited in 1982. The archbishop, who has been a major advocate of reconciliation between Anglicanism and Roman Catholicism, has signaled his disdain for the pope’s move by making statements that have conveyed a mood of indifference toward the papal visit.

The proposed compromise in York was co-sponsored by the second most senior prelate in the Church of England, John Sentamu, the archbishop of York. The two men had staked their authority and prestige on winning support for their proposals, and their failure left the Church of England — and the wider Anglican Communion, with an estimated 80 million followers worldwide — facing a new low in its long battle to avert a breakup that would create two rival Anglican communions, one traditionalist and the other reformist.

The Church of England Synod has at least 10 more hours of debate over the next three days on the terms under which women will be consecrated as bishops — a step that was formally approved two years ago. Women priests have been ordained in the Church of England since 1994 and now represent nearly a third of the church’s working clergy.

Reformers had argued that the latest compromise would reduce women bishops to “second class” status among bishops and would lead to inevitable conflict.

Although the proposals won support from two of the three houses of the Synod, the bishops and the laity, it was narrowly rejected, by a vote of 90 to 85, by the House of Clergy.

As the Synod opened in York, Dr. Sentamu, who was born in Uganda, offered an outspoken defense of the archbishop, who has become an antihero for many traditionalists in the Anglican Communion. He told the Synod that “enough is enough” in the “general disregard for the truth” and “a rapacious appetite for ‘carelessness’ compounded by spin, propaganda and a resort to misleading opinions paraded as fact regarding a remarkable, gifted and much-maligned Christian leader I call a dear friend.”

ACLU asks federal agency to investigate Catholic hospitals on abortion

By Nancy Frazier O'Brien
Catholic News Service

WASHINGTON (CNS) -- The American Civil Liberties Union has launched the latest salvo in the controversy over an abortion performed at a Phoenix Catholic hospital with the approval of the hospital's ethics committee, including a nun.

In a July 1 letter to the acting administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the ACLU said the Phoenix case and others cited in an October 2008 article in the American Journal of Public Health show that "religiously affiliated hospitals across the country inappropriately and unlawfully deny pregnant women emergency medical care."

But Sister Carol Keehan, a Daughter of Charity who is president and CEO of the Catholic Health Association, told Catholic News Service July 9 that "a couple of stories that the ACLU has dredged up doesn't hold a candle to the competent care and respect for both mothers and their infants that have been a daily part of life in the maternity units and neonatal units of Catholic hospitals for decades."

In contrast to the "unsubstantiated" examples cited by the ACLU stands a history of "hundreds of thousands of women and their infants who have been cared for wonderfully well" in Catholic hospitals, she added.

The ACLU's letter said Catholic hospitals have violated both the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, which requires hospitals that participate in Medicare and Medicaid to treat patients in emergencies and active labor, and the Conditions of Participation for hospitals receiving Medicare and Medicaid funds, which require that patients be informed of their rights prior to furnishing or discontinuing care.

The letter was signed by the director and legislative counsel for the ACLU's legislative office, two attorneys for the ACLU Foundation's Reproductive Freedom Project and the legal director of ACLU of Arizona. It asked the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to "investigate these situations, provide technical assistance where appropriate and take any measures to fully enforce" the law and the Conditions of Participation.

"Moreover, we ask that you clarify in the appropriate CMS program manual, and issue a transmittal, that denial of emergency reproductive health care violates" the law and the conditions, it said.

The Phoenix case discussed in the letter involved a mother of four who was 11 weeks pregnant and suffering from pulmonary hypertension when she was admitted to St. Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center in Phoenix in November 2009.

After her doctors determined that the woman was likely to die if she did not have an abortion, a hospital ethics committee -- which included Mercy Sister Margaret Mary McBride, then vice president of mission integration at St. Joseph's -- concurred in the decision to abort, saying it would not violate the "Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services."

When news of the abortion surfaced several months later, Phoenix Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted said Sister Margaret had incurred automatic excommunication because of her participation in an abortion; the nun, who has not commented on the controversy, was subsequently reassigned to a different position within the hospital.

The bishop said that "the direct killing of an unborn child is always immoral, no matter the circumstances, and it cannot be permitted in any institution that claims to be authentically Catholic."

Some moral theologians and officials of Catholic Healthcare West, the San Francisco-based health system to which St. Joseph's belongs, have argued that the abortion was permissible under a section of the directives that says: "Operations, treatments and medications that have as their direct purpose the cure of a proportionately serious pathological condition of a pregnant woman are permitted when they cannot be safely postponed until the unborn child is viable, even if they will result in the death of the unborn child."

In their letter, the ACLU officials also cited other examples of what they called "the refusal to provide timely reproductive health care to pregnant women" at Catholic hospitals. The examples were taken from an October 2008 article in the American Journal of Public Health, which was based on interviews with 30 obstetricians-gynecologists in 2006.

Thirteen of the physicians had worked "regularly or occasionally" in Catholic-run medical facilities, and six of those said they had experienced at least one case in which "abortion was medically indicated according to their medical judgment but, because of the ethics committee's ruling, it was delayed until either fetal heartbeats ceased or the patient could be transported to another facility," according to the journal article.

Anglicans expect exodus after Church of England OKs women bishops

By Simon Caldwell
Catholic News Service
July 13, 2010

LONDON (CNS) -- The largest Anglo-Catholic group in the Church of England is expecting an exodus of thousands of Anglicans to Catholicism after a decision to ordain women as bishops without sufficient concessions to traditionalists.

Stephen Parkinson, director of Forward in Faith -- a group that has about 10,000 members, including more than 1,000 clergy -- told Catholic News Service in a July 13 telephone interview that a large number of Anglo-Catholics are considering conversion to the Catholic faith.

His comments came after the General Synod, the national assembly of the Church of England, voted at a meeting in York to approve the creation of women bishops by 2014 without meeting the demands of objectors.

A July 12 statement from Forward in Faith advised members against hasty action, saying now was "not the time for precipitate action."

"This draft measure does nothing for us at all," said Parkinson. "We explained very carefully why we could not accept women bishops theologically.

"We explained what would enable us to stay in the Church of England, but the General Synod has decided to get rid of us by giving us a provision that does not meet our needs," he said. "They are saying either put up or shut up and accept innovations, however unscriptural or heretical, or get out."

Parkinson said he expected thousands of members of Forward in Faith to consider accepting Pope Benedict XVI's offer of a personal ordinariate, issued last November in the apostolic constitution "Anglicanorum coetibus," in which a group of Anglicans can be received into the Catholic Church while retaining their distinctive patrimony and liturgical practices.

"Many, I expect, will be exploring the provisions of Pope Benedict's apostolic constitution. We have got 10,000 members, so clearly we are talking about thousands," he added.

A number of breakaway national Anglican churches, in communion with the Traditional Anglican Communion rather than the much larger Worldwide Anglican Communion, have already written to the Vatican to accept the pope's offer.

The defection of thousands of mainstream Anglican traditionalists from the Church of England would represent the largest single block.

Parkinson said developments were unlikely within the next six months, however, adding that until women bishops are ordained, Anglican traditionalists had a "couple of years" to think about what to do.

The Forward in Faith statement said the proposals must be considered by provincial synods in September and the outcomes could be debated a month later when Forward in Faith holds its annual meeting.

The decision by the General Synod came after nearly 12 hours of debate on a compromise proposed by the Archbishop Rowan Williams of Canterbury and Archbishop John Sentamu of York was narrowly defeated.

The diocesan synods have now been asked to scrutinize a scheme where women bishops would have the authority to make alternative arrangements for objectors through a statutory code of practice. The Anglo-Catholic group of the synod had wanted episcopal visitors, or "flying bishops," to minister to their members instead, but their requests were rejected.

If the resolution is supported by a majority of the diocesan synods, it will be returned to the General Synod for ratification in 2012.

Archbishop Williams told the General Synod that its vote illustrated that the Church of England was "committed by a majority to the desirability of seeing women as bishops for the health and flourishing of the work of God's kingdom, of this church and this nation."

"We are also profoundly committed by a majority in the synod to a maximum generosity that can be consistently and coherently exercised toward the consciences of minorities and we have not yet cracked how to do that," he said during the July 12 debate.

The Church of England first voted to ordain women as priests in 1992, a move that led to about 500 clergy defecting to the Catholic Church.

Since 1994, when the changes came into force, more than 5,000 women have been ordained as Anglican priests.

Last year, the Catholic Bishops' Conference of England and Wales set up a committee of bishops to liaise with Anglicans interested in a personal ordinariate, which will resemble a military diocese in structure, and also with the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

On July 5, Catholic Bishop Malcolm McMahon of Nottingham met about 70 Anglican clerics to discuss the possibility of an English ordinariate.


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


Anglican trads reach a crossroads

AUTHOR: AUSTEN IVEREIGH
America Magazine
TUESDAY, JULY 13, 2010 02:35:39 PM

Pope Benedict XVI's homecoming offer to Anglican opponents of women bishops looks more enticing now that the Church of England Synod has rejected a proposal for a separate jusrisdiction to accommodate them. The scheme put forward by the Archbishops of Canterbury and York was voted down by the Church's ruling body at the weekend, following years of wrangling, politicking and threats.

Although there are still two more years of committees before the legislation is ready to go to Parliament -- and would need a two-thirds majority in 2012 -- the notion that opponents will be able to create a separate jurisdiction of refuseniks is now dead in the water. The Guardian's veteran religion reporter Andrew Brown wrote: "I have been watching this story, more or less, for nearly 25 years now, and in all that endless wrangling this is only the second time I can remember the synod making an unequivocal choice."

That doesn't mean that the 1,300 clergy and 10,000 parishioners in the Anglo-Catholic wing will be rushing into the Catholic Church; the term "exodus" in a CNS report is too strong. But there is little doubt now that an ordinariate in England and Wales will be set up: last week 70 Anglo-Catholics met the Catholic bishop of Nottingham, Malcolm McMahon, for a preliminary discussion. A number of traditionalist Anglican bishops have had talks with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) in Rome before now, but this is the first time the hierarchy of England and Wales have been seriously approached.

The ordinariate allows for the corporate reception of Anglicans into a special canonical jurisdiction -- such as exists for the armed forces -- which would make them full Roman Catholics but allow them to preserve their distinctive "patrimony". This means, in essence, a separate liturgy: according to Anglicanorum coetibus, "the Ordinariate has the faculty to celebrate the Holy Eucharist and the other Sacraments, the Liturgy of the Hours and other liturgical celebrations according to the liturgical books proper to the Anglican tradition, which have been approved by the Holy See, so as to maintain the liturgical, spiritual and pastoral traditions of the Anglican Communion within the Catholic Church, as a precious gift nourishing the faith of the members of the Ordinariate and as a treasure to be shared."

That is the principle; what, in practice, is approved and not approved by Rome is still to be worked out, and will only become clear when it happens -- which is why only the keenest will jump first. The rest will stand back and watch how it turns out -- not just in England and Wales but in Australia and elsewhere.

But this weekend a threshold was crossed. Long stranded between the Protestant drift of their Church and a Catholic Church which refuses to recognises the validity of their orders, the Catholic Anglicans now find that the "halfway house" they have been inhabiting since 1992 through the "flying bishop" scheme is no longer feasible. It may take a year or two for them to decide, but this weekend the choice was crystallised. It's decision time.

BLOGS » JIMMY AKIN
JIMMYAKIN
Did Obama Lie on Abortion?
Share BY JIMMY AKIN Wednesday, July 14, 2010 9:51 AM Comments (6)
Remember how President Obama promised that his health care legislation wouldn’t cover abortion?

Remember all that stuff with the Stupak amendment, which was later abandoned?

Remember how the deal in abandoning the Stupak amendment involved a presidential order that would keep federal dollars from going to abortion?

Remember how pro-life legal experts said the presidential order wasn’t worth the paper it was written on?

Remember all that?

Well, now comes this news:

The Obama administration has officially approved the first instance of taxpayer funded abortions under the new national government-run health care program. This is the kind of abortion funding the pro-life movement warned about when Congress considered the bill.

The Obama Administration will give Pennsylvania $160 million to set up a new “high-risk” insurance program under a provision of the federal health care legislation enacted in March.

It has quietly approved a plan submitted by an appointee of pro-abortion Governor Edward Rendell under which the new program will cover any abortion that is legal in Pennsylvania.

There is still some legal sleight of hand involved:

The section on abortion (see page 14) asserts that “elective abortions are not covered,” though it does not define elective—which [National Right to Life legislative director Douglas] Johnson calls a “red herring.”

The proposal specifies coverage “includes only abortions and contraceptives that satisfy the requirements of” several specific statutes, the most pertinent of which is 18 Pa. C.S. § 3204, which says abortion is legal in Pennsylvania. The statute essentially says all abortions except those to determine the sex of the baby are legal.

“Under the Rendell-Sebelius plan, federal funds will subsidize coverage of abortion performed for any reason, except sex selection,” said NRLC’s Johnson. “The Pennsylvania proposal conspicuously lacks language that would prevent funding of abortions performed as a method of birth control or for any other reason, except sex selection—and the Obama Administration has now approved this.”

So what do you think? Did President Obama lie?

Maybe this is why the Netherlands lost. The Eucharist should be the focus of Mass, not a soccer ball. As Papa has pointed out before, the Mass should not be a show with the priest as chief entertainer. Of course, Papa said it much better.


Church punishes priest for soccer Mass

FoxSoccer.com
Updated Jul 16, 2010 10:46 PM ET

A Catholic priest who made headlines around the world by holding an orange Mass to pray for the Dutch team before its World Cup final against Spain has been suspended by his bishop, a parish official said on Friday.

Bishop Jozef Punt of Haarlem said in a statement issued late Thursday that Rev. Paul Vlaar's packed service in the village of Obdam north of Amsterdam "did not do justice to the sacred nature of the Eucharist."

Vlaar wore an orange robe and decorated the church with orange flags. During the service he acted as a goalkeeper when a parishioner kicked a football down the aisle.

The bishop said the service "caused outrage" in the Netherlands and overseas. He ordered Vlaar to enter "a period of reflection" and suspended him from his duties.

Vlaar was not available for comment on Friday, but Obdam Parish vice chairman Win Bijman said his congregation was "shocked and disappointed" by the popular priest's suspension.

"People do not understand it. Everybody supports Pastor Paul and we don't see what was so bad that he should be temporarily suspended," Bijman said in a telephone interview.

"Maybe we allowed ourselves to be swept along a little too much in the Oranje euphoria," he added, referring to the Dutch football team. "But it is part of Pastor Paul's personality that he manages to harness that kind of enthusiasm to get people into church. The church here is full and in other places churches are empty."

Vlaar's prayers went unanswered in the final: The Netherlands lost 1-0.

USCCB issues guidelines for use of social media

By Mark Pattison
Catholic News Service
July 21, 2010

WASHINGTON (CNS) -- The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has issued a set of guidelines for using social media, especially as social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter continue to gain in popularity.

"Social media are the fastest growing form of communication in the United States, especially among youth and young adults," the guidelines say. "Our church cannot ignore it, but at the same time we must engage social media in a manner that is safe, responsible and civil."

"My hope is that they'll be a useful resource to people, especially to dioceses and parishes that are interested in using social media," said Helen Osman, USCCB secretary for communications, in a July 19 interview with Catholic News Service.

The guidelines, which Osman said were posted on the USCCB's website in early July, can be accessed by going to www.usccb.org/comm/social-media-guidelines.shtml.

"The church can use social media to encourage respect, dialogue, and honest relationships -- in other words, 'true friendship,'" said the guidelines, quoting from Pope Benedict XVI's 2010 World Communications Day message. "To do so requires us to approach social media as powerful means of evangelization and to consider the church's role in providing a Christian perspective on digital literacy."

The guidelines point to visibility, community and accountability as three principal areas where the church can make a positive mark in social media.

"The key question that faces each church organization that decides to engage social media is, How will we engage?" the guidelines said. "Careful consideration should be made to determine the particular strengths of each form of social media," which include blogs, text messages and social networks, and the needs of a ministry, parish, or organization. "The strengths should match the needs," they added.

"In the case of social media, the axiom 'build it and they will come' is not applicable. It is important to set internal expectations regarding how often posts will be made, so that your followers can become accustomed to your schedule," the guidelines said.

Social media can be powerful tools for strengthening community, according to the guidelines, "although social media interaction should not be viewed as a substitute for face-to-face gatherings. Social media can support communities in a myriad of ways," including connecting people with similar interests, sharing information about in-person events and providing ways for people to engage in dialogue.

"It is important that creators and site administrators of social media understand how much social media are different from mass media and the expectations of their consumers," the guidelines said. "Social media's emphasis is on the word 'social,' with a general blurring of the distinction between creators of content and consumers of content."

The USCCB's own Facebook site lays out ground rules: "All posts and comments should be marked by Christian charity and respect for the truth. They should be on topic and presume the good will of other posters. Discussion should take place primarily from a faith perspective. No ads please." The guidelines recommend "always" blocking usage by anyone who does not abide by an established code of conduct. "Do not allow those unwilling to dialogue to hold your site and its other members hostage," it said.

"You would think as Catholics you wouldn't have to remind us to play nice, but it was in every set of guidelines I looked at," Osman told CNS.

It may seem counterintuitive, but Osman said she has "gotten one request for a printed version" of the guidelines. She said, though, that it "needs to be a living, breathing document on the Web. There may need to be changes on a regular basis."

One potential change: The guidelines said there are "400 million active users" on Facebook. But Facebook's founders were set to announce before the end of July that the social networking site had reached the 500 million mark.

Spanish judge fined for refusing to allow adoption by lesbian couple

Madrid, Spain, Jul 22, 2010 / 02:03 pm (CNA).- Next month, former Judge Fernando Ferrin Calamita will be forced to pay the Spanish government $127,000 for denying a lesbian couple’s request to adopt a girl.

Ferrin, who is married and a father of seven, was a judge in the Spanish towns of Huesca, Bejar and Chiclana. He also served as a family court judge in Murcia from 1999 to 2008, when the Supreme Court suspended him for two years and three months for ruling against the controversial adoption.

In Ferrin’s ruling he ordered a report be obtained from experts on the consequences the adoption would have on the girl’s development.

In December of 2009, the Supreme Court suspended him, fined him $919 and ordered him to pay the couple $7,661.

According to the organization, Professionals for Ethics, “the powerful Spanish homosexual lobby, with the consent or passivity of all the institutions, decided to punish Ferrin and make him an example.” He was accused of maliciously delaying the adoption request and subjected to pressure and blackmail.

“This process has had as its purpose the expulsion of Fernando Ferrin from the bench, after a career as a just judge with an impeccable record … But this is not all. Now the government is demanding he repay his salary of $127,000 which he received while on temporary suspension.

“Although Ferrin plans to appeal this ruling, he must pay the fine before August 5,” the organization stated.

CLOISTERED NUNS SIGN RECORD DEAL

[Supposedly with the same record company Lady Gaga is signed up with.]

LE BARROUX, France, JULY 26, 2010 (Zenit.org).- Nuns may renounce the secular world and enter a cloister, but the world continues to pursue them, as demonstrated by a deal between a record company and a Benedictine community.

Decca Records, which has as its parent company Universal Music Group, pursued a deal with the Benedictine community of the Abbaye de Notre-Dame de l'Annonciation (Abbey of Our Lady of the Annunciation) in Le Barroux, near Avignon, France.

The community was chosen out of a selection of 70 convents worldwide for its superior singing of Gregorian chant.

The abbess said, "We never sought this; it came looking for us."

She continued: "At first we were worried it would affect our cloistered life, so we asked St Joseph in prayer.

"Our prayers were answered, and we thought that this album would be a good thing if it touches people's lives and helps them find peace."

The community of 28 nuns sings the Gregorian chant eight times every day.

The contract deal was negotiated through the cloister grille, and the community will take charge of any photography or video required for advertising.

Decca plans to release the album, "Voice: Chant From Avignon" in November.

This article caught my eye because my son, the priest, is leading a pilgrimage next year to the Greek isles, Istanbul, and Ephesus. Supposedly it is a journey in the footsteps of St. Paul although some of the Greek isles being visited don't seem to have any connection to the saint. They are popular tourist spots though.


Exotic Catholic Travel: Istanbul

The Crossroads Where East Meets West

BY Jeff Gardner,
National Catholic Register Correspondent
8/8/10 at 9:00 AM

Istanbul is one of the world’s great geographical crossroads. “A place where East meets West,” as the cliché goes, only scratches the cultural surface of this eclectic city situated on the Bosporus Strait.

Originally named Constantinople after the Roman Emperor Constantine, Istanbul has outlasted two great empires: the Byzantine or Eastern Roman Empire, founded by Constantine in the early 330s, and the Ottoman Empire, run by the Turks from the city after besieging it and capturing it from the Byzantines in 1453. In 1923 the Ottoman Empire collapsed and the present-day Republic of Turkey emerged. Though Ankara is the nation’s capital, Istanbul is still its heart and soul.

As a world’s crossroads, Istanbul enjoys a steady flow of merchants and travelers. The inhabitants of the city understand that an accommodating attitude and heaps of hospitality keep the money flowing, and the tourists coming back for more.

It’s easy to get around in Istanbul. Most Turks speak English well and are eager to help you find what you need. Reciprocate their hospitality by learning a few words of Turkish, such as lütfen (“please”) and teşekkür (“thank you”), and you should have no problem enjoying this fascinating city.

But beware: Like any metropolis, Istanbul has its share of pickpockets and ne’er-do-wells. Keep your valuables close to your body and use common sense when traveling.

Hagia Sophia

It may cost a little more, but try to book a hotel in the “old town,” the historic Istanbul south of the Golden Horn inlet. This area has been the city’s epicenter for centuries, and staying here puts you within walking distance of the city’s greatest sites.

Your first stop must be Hagia Sophia (Aya Sofya in Turkish), the Church of Holy Wisdom. Rebuilt in 537 (the original structure burnt down in a city-wide riot) under the direction of the Roman Emperor Justinian, Hagia Sophia was the architectural and liturgical center of Eastern Christendom until 1054. In that year, the papal legate Cardinal Humbert of Mourmoutiers laid a decree of excommunication against the patriarch of Constantinople on Hagia Sophia’s high altar (during Mass no less), creating the Great Schism between East and West, a regrettable condition that persists to this day.

In 1453, when the city fell to the invading Muslim Turks, Hagia Sophia was brutally violated: Its doors were smashed, and those seeking refuge in the great church were slaughtered or sold as slaves. The Muslim invaders later tore out the church’s relics and altars, plastered over its gleaming mosaics, and converted the church into a mosque. In 1935 the Republic of Turkey reclassified Hagia Sophia as a museum, forbidding worship of any kind in the church.

Even in its dilapidated state, Hagia Sophia immediately impresses you with a sense of power and grace. Its great dome towers 180 feet above your head, and its many windows let in a flood of light. If you were to compile a list of “101 places every Christian should see,” Hagia Sophia would rank in the top 10.

In the afternoon, Turks love to slow down, have tea and a small bite to eat. After visiting Hagia Sophia, recharge at the Derviş Café, just across the street from the church. Try Turkish tea in a glass (bardak çay), relax and watch the crowds go by.

The Blue Mosque

Directly facing Hagia Sophia is the Sultan Ahmed (Sultanahmet Camii in Turkish) Mosque. Nicknamed the Blue Mosque for its blue-tiled interior, the Sultan Ahmed was Islam’s response to Christendom’s great cathedral. Built in the early 1600s during the rule of Sultan Ahmed I, the mosque is intentionally larger than Hagia Sophia and stands on the site of the ancient Roman racetrack. Lavish gardens and successive courtyards surround the mosque, whose interior is lit by hundreds of lights reflecting off its brilliant, multicolored marble and tiled surfaces.

Grand Bazaar and Holy Relics

Next, pop over to the Kapali Carsisi, the Grand (covered) Bazaar. This bazaar, which has been a main shopping center in Istanbul for centuries, is a labyrinth of shops, boutiques and cafés. If you venture in, expect crowds and aggressive merchants who are not shy about telling you what you need. Only barter with a merchant if you are serious about buying something.

In the evening, go down to the Galata Bridge for something to eat and a breath of fresh sea air. The Turks love to cook, and much of what we think of as “Greek food” is actually Turkish. Roast meats, vegetables, kebabs, breads, fish and lots of thick, tart yogurt can be had for very little. If you are in a hurry, try a balik ekmek (fish sandwich) caught, cooked and served from boats docked near the bridge. With sea salt and lemon juice, it’s delicious.

To escape Istanbul’s crowds, rise early and go to the Topkapi Palace and museum. This palace, laid out in its current form in the late 1400s, was the seat of power for the Turkish Sultans for five centuries. Successive courtyards and groomed lawns with shade trees give you a glimpse of how the royal family lived during the Ottoman Empire.

The royal quarters where the sultan, his family and, yes, many concubines lived are there, but be sure not to miss the Chamber of Holy Relics, which has King David’s sword, a fragment of Moses’ staff, and John the Baptist’s arm and a section of his skull. Relics of Mohammed are also on display.

Cathedral on a Modern Street

To see how the city has evolved since the fall of the Ottomans, cross the Galata Bridge to Istiklal Avenue (Caddesi in Turkish), the modern street in the city. Running for over a mile and a half, Istiklal Avenue is Istanbul’s answer to Paris’ Champs-Élysées and contains more shops, cafés and restaurants than could be visited in a month. The street is for pedestrian traffic only and offers a glimpse at the architecture of the various European powers that have had a heavy hand in shaping modern-day Turkey.

About midway on the avenue stands St. Anthony of Padua Cathedral, a beautiful structure dating from the early 1900s. From 1935 to 1944, Pope John XXIII, then Angelo Roncalli, celebrated Mass here as the apostolic delegate to Turkey. The liturgy is still celebrated at the cathedral in English every Sunday morning.

Lastly, take a boat tour around the Bosporus Strait to get “the big picture” of the reach and history of this beautiful city. Spanning both Asia and Europe, past and present, small wonder that Istanbul was named Europe’s “Cultural Capital for 2010.”


Jeff Gardner is the CEO of Catholic Media International.

Free the Monks!

This legal restriction really annoys me. The abbey in the video is about an hour from our house. The caskets the monks make are simple and beautiful (and pretty inexpensive) but now the monks can't sell them to people. Instead, families are forced to go to a funeral home and buy a very expensive and elaborate casket for their deceased loved one. It ain't fair. I hope the monks win their legal battle.

Obedience vs. Conscience
Help Lapsed Catholics Return by Teaching Them to Fall in Love With Christ and His Church

Share BY JANET SMITH 08/13/2010 Comments (19)
What to do about all the lapsed Catholics? Those Catholics who don’t come to church because they reject the Church’s teachings on such matters as contraception, the ordination of women to the diaconate, and married priests.

Father Joseph Breen of Nashville proposed in a video posted last month on his parish website (and since removed) that these individuals are under the erroneous view that they need to accept these teachings. He says that as adults they need to be obedient to nothing but “the spirit of God”: The conscience is supreme.

Ironically, Father Breen invokes a Church teaching to defend rejecting Church teaching. He likely has in mind the principle found in the Catechism: “A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience” (No. 1790). He rejects the principle articulated in Lumen Gentium No. 25: “In matters of faith and morals, the bishops speak in the name of Christ and the faithful are to accept their teaching and adhere to it with a religious assent.” Father Breen chooses to believe what he wants to believe and rejects the rest.

How can it be simultaneously true that Catholics must follow their consciences and that Catholics must follow Church teaching?

First, we must understand that the conscience is not equivalent to our thoughts or our opinions or our judgments. The Catechism (No. 1776) defines the conscience as an inner sanctuary in which we listen to God’s voice for guidance about our actions. So when someone is consulting his or her conscience, the question being asked is not “Do I think this action is good or bad?” but “Does God judge this action to be good or bad?” And God speaks to the consciences of Catholics through the Church.

If a Catholic is considering doing something that the Church teaches to be wrong, he can be certain that he is not listening to his conscience, but some other “voice” that has caught his attention.

Consider a question of conscience of this sort: “My wife has been in a persistent vegetative state for years. Would it be immoral for me to have relations with my lovely, lonely, unmarried secretary? We would get married if we could, but until my wife dies, I am not free to marry.”

Suppose this unfortunate, lonely husband said he thought his conscience was clear on this point — he was not really committing adultery because his wife was not available as a wife. Now, only God knows the extent of this man’s confusion and how honestly he has tried to work through the issues. But wouldn’t a Catholic priest have to say to this man, “I am sorry, but you are not properly consulting your conscience. God is clear on this point: Adultery is having sexual intercourse with someone who is not your spouse, and that is precisely what you would be doing.”

Such a man ignoring Church teaching would certainly be welcome to attend Catholic services, but would not be welcome to receive the Eucharist.

Let’s consider another question: “Should I have a baby through in vitro fertilization?” I suspect a Catholic asking the question in the proper fashion — “Would God approve of me having a baby through in vitro fertilization?” — when talking with God in her inner sanctuary, would hear God’s voice say: “You are a Catholic; I have set up the Church to guide you in such decisions; turn to the Church for guidance, and you will be hearing my voice on this matter.”

She must now do what Catholics are obliged to do: “Form” her conscience (Catechism, Nos. 1783-87). Truly forming the conscience involves reading Church documents, seeking clarification on difficult points, and praying that God will lead one to the truth. After all that, suppose she still is not convinced that IVF is moral. Is she free to utilize IVF and still remain a Catholic in good standing?

Only God can know the source of her confusion, but any Catholic priest should tell her she is violating God’s law and would not be free to receive the Eucharist, though she is certainly welcome at church.

Would Father Breen maintain that the above individuals are doing what is right when they follow their “consciences”? Would Father Breen hold that there are any teachings of the Church from which a Catholic is not free to dissent on the basis of conscience? Teachings on racism, greed etc.?

He may respond that different kinds of teaching require different levels of obedience. It is correct that the Church itself teaches that different teachings require different levels of adherence, but all of those listed by Father Breen as nonbinding the Church teaches require “religious assent.”

What should we do to bring lapsed Catholics back to the Church? Father Breen recommends that we turn the Church into a more inviting place, and he believes the Church would be more welcoming were it to become more like Protestant churches which accept contraception, women ministers and married priests.

What will Father Breen provide that these churches don’t? Some even have plush seating and Starbucks coffee. What can compete with that? The sacraments?

Well, the validity of the sacraments is dependent upon a certain structure of the Church that is rooted in the validity of the papacy. But Father Breen is questioning the papacy, and he encourages his flock to do the same. A huge flaw in his proposal is that Protestant churches are rapidly declining in membership, not growing. I suspect their flocks will decline further as those lapsed Catholics who have found their way there eventually cease worshipping altogether.

Let me offer a proposal for winning back lapsed Catholics: something worth coming back to.

Priests should evince a tremendous love for Christ and his Church and the papacy. They should do everything they can to help their congregation fall in love with Christ and his Church; they should encourage them to read Scripture and receive the sacraments; they should find a myriad of ways to help them understand and accept Church teaching on difficult issues and inspire them to live lives of radical Christian service.

These Catholics will then go out into the world as powerhouses of grace and as knowledgeable witnesses to their faith. I suspect both lapsed Catholics and those who are entirely “unchurched” might find the Catholic Church has something to offer them found nowhere else in the world.

Janet E. Smith is the Father Michael J. McGivney Chair of Life Ethics at Sacred Heart Major Seminary in Detroit.

This is just sad. So many people making a pilgrimage to Lourdes are already afflicted without having to worry about being blown up while praying. Just having to be evacuated had to be a terrible burden to many of them.


Pilgrims evacuated after bomb threat at Lourdes

By CECILE BRISSON
(AP)
August 15, 2010

PARIS — Thousands of people, many disabled or ailing, were evacuated Sunday from the shrine at Lourdes in southern France after a bomb threat on the Catholic holy day of Assumption.

Some 30,000 pilgrims were at the site in the foothills of the Pyrenees late morning when Lourdes police received a threat saying a bomb would hit the site Sunday afternoon, said shrine spokesman Pierre Adias.

Police ordered everyone evacuated, and explosives experts were sent to scour the area. The pilgrims were told to leave just as the midday Mass was meant to begin. "The shrine is currently empty," Adias told The Associated Press by telephone.

No other information was immediately available about the source or nature of the threat.
Live coverage of Sunday's services on the website of TV Lourdes was not available, for reasons "independent of our will," according to a message on its home page.

The Aug. 15 holiday sees a particularly large influx of pilgrims at Lourdes, reputed for its healing powers. Some pilgrims came to this year's ceremonies in wheelchairs, others supported by loved ones, in images shown on French television.

Assumption marks the heavenly assumption of the Virgin Mary, and is a public holiday in France and several other countries.

The Roman Catholic shrine at Lourdes has a special meaning for the suffering, many of whom believe that its spring water has the power to heal and even work miracles.

The sick bathe in pools of the cool water and take it home in plastic jugs and vials in the shape of the Virgin Mary. Thousands of people have claimed to be cured there, and the Roman Catholic church has officially recognized 67 incidents of miraculous healing linked to Lourdes.

Pope Benedict XVI came to Lourdes in 2008, marking the 150th anniversary of visions of the Virgin Mary to a Lourdes peasant girl, 14-year-old Bernadette Soubirous, who was later made a saint.


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


Lourdes evacuated for bomb scare, evening events uninterrupted

Lourdes, France, Aug 16, 2010 / 05:44 am (CNA/EWTN News).- Tens of thousands of people were forced to evacuate the Marian Sanctuary in Lourdes on Sunday because of a bomb threat. Allowed to return later in the day, the faithful resumed with the programmed schedule of worship and took part in the traditional afternoon procession.

The estimated number of pilgrims in Lourdes on Sunday was put at about 30,000 by local media, with large delegations coming particularly from France and Italy.

According to Agence France Presse (AFP), at around noon an anonymous call was made to the local police station warning that four bombs would explode at 3 p.m., the time that Mass was scheduled to start.

Having evacuated the sanctuary, police and bomb-sniffing dogs conducted a search of the site. It was reopened to the masses at around 4 p.m. when no explosives were found.

The Solemnity of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary is traditionally one of the busiest days of the year at the sanctuary, for its importance as a Marian celebration and also for the practical reason that it takes place during the summer holidays of August. Many French Catholics take part in the National Pilgrimage organized every year to coincide with the solemnity.

Speaking about the bomb scare, a local police spokesman called it a "cruel hoax," saying that the caller did nothing more than cause additional problems for those already suffering from illnesses and handicaps.

While a prayer for France and the world and a chaplet originally scheduled to be said at the grotto had to be observed from outside the gates of the sanctuary, the evacuation did not keep people from taking part in the National Pilgrimage-organized Eucharistic procession at 5 p.m.

After ACLU complaint about Catholic workers refusing to perform abortions, legal fund offers help

Washington D.C., Aug 22, 2010 / 07:53 am (CNA).- Responding to an American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) request for a government investigation into and action against Catholic hospitals which refuse to provide abortions, the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty has said it will offer pro bono legal help to any hospital or individual threatened for refusing to perform an abortion.

In a July 1 letter the ACLU wrote to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), claiming that religiously-affiliated hospitals’ refusal to provide abortions violates the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act and the Conditions of Participation of Medicare and Medicaid.

“Religiously affiliated hospitals across the country inappropriately and unlawfully deny pregnant women emergency medical care,” the ACLU claimed.

The ACLU letter also highlighted the disciplinary action taken against Sr. Margaret Mary McBride, who approved a direct abortion at a Catholic hospital in Phoenix and was later removed from her hospital post and declared excommunicated.

In response, the Beckett Fund sent an Aug. 19 letter to the HHS saying that legal conscience protections have been in existence for decades. It argued that the ACLU misinterprets the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act.

“We will represent, pro bono, any religious hospital or its personnel that HHS threatens because of their conscientious objection to abortion,” commented Beckett Fund president Kevin “Seamus” Hasson. "And we will, if necessary, sue to block any such proposed policy."

“The ACLU has no business radically re-defining the meaning of ‘emergency health care’,” Hasson declared, “just as it has no business demanding that religious doctors and nurses violate their faith by performing a procedure they believe is tantamount to murder. Forcing religious hospitals to perform abortions not only undermines this nation’s integral commitment to conscience rights, it violates the numerous federal laws that recognize and protect those rights.”

Hasson argued that forcing Catholic or other religiously-affiliated hospitals to perform abortions will only result in nationwide closures and reduce access to healthcare for everyone. Legally forcing doctors and nurses to perform abortions would also impact religious freedom, he added.

Direct abortion is always prohibited by Catholic teaching and efforts to treat or cure a pregnant mother in a dangerous situation can take place only when her unborn child’s possible death is indirect and unintended.

While the ACLU’s July 1 letter focused on women with severe health conditions, in the past the organization has advocated restricting the general ability of Catholic hospitals and other institutions to refuse to perform procedures they find objectionable, such as sterilizations or abortions.

In a 2002 report titled “Religious Refusals and Reproductive Rights,” the ACLU’s Reproductive Freedom Project argued that concerns for individual religious belief and institutional religious worship should be “balanced” with protections for “reproductive health,” patient autonomy, and “gender equality.”

“The law should not permit an institution’s religious strictures to interfere with the public’s access to reproductive health care,” the report’s executive summary argued.

After ACLU complaint about Catholic workers refusing to perform abortions, legal fund offers help

Washington D.C., Aug 22, 2010 / 07:53 am (CNA).- Responding to an American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) request for a government investigation into and action against Catholic hospitals which refuse to provide abortions, the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty has said it will offer pro bono legal help to any hospital or individual threatened for refusing to perform an abortion.

In a July 1 letter the ACLU wrote to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), claiming that religiously-affiliated hospitals’ refusal to provide abortions violates the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act and the Conditions of Participation of Medicare and Medicaid.

“Religiously affiliated hospitals across the country inappropriately and unlawfully deny pregnant women emergency medical care,” the ACLU claimed.

The ACLU letter also highlighted the disciplinary action taken against Sr. Margaret Mary McBride, who approved a direct abortion at a Catholic hospital in Phoenix and was later removed from her hospital post and declared excommunicated.

In response, the Beckett Fund sent an Aug. 19 letter to the HHS saying that legal conscience protections have been in existence for decades. It argued that the ACLU misinterprets the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act.

“We will represent, pro bono, any religious hospital or its personnel that HHS threatens because of their conscientious objection to abortion,” commented Beckett Fund president Kevin “Seamus” Hasson. "And we will, if necessary, sue to block any such proposed policy."

“The ACLU has no business radically re-defining the meaning of ‘emergency health care’,” Hasson declared, “just as it has no business demanding that religious doctors and nurses violate their faith by performing a procedure they believe is tantamount to murder. Forcing religious hospitals to perform abortions not only undermines this nation’s integral commitment to conscience rights, it violates the numerous federal laws that recognize and protect those rights.”

Hasson argued that forcing Catholic or other religiously-affiliated hospitals to perform abortions will only result in nationwide closures and reduce access to healthcare for everyone. Legally forcing doctors and nurses to perform abortions would also impact religious freedom, he added.

Direct abortion is always prohibited by Catholic teaching and efforts to treat or cure a pregnant mother in a dangerous situation can take place only when her unborn child’s possible death is indirect and unintended.

While the ACLU’s July 1 letter focused on women with severe health conditions, in the past the organization has advocated restricting the general ability of Catholic hospitals and other institutions to refuse to perform procedures they find objectionable, such as sterilizations or abortions.

In a 2002 report titled “Religious Refusals and Reproductive Rights,” the ACLU’s Reproductive Freedom Project argued that concerns for individual religious belief and institutional religious worship should be “balanced” with protections for “reproductive health,” patient autonomy, and “gender equality.”

“The law should not permit an institution’s religious strictures to interfere with the public’s access to reproductive health care,” the report’s executive summary argued.

Annulments and American Catholics

Weekend Book Pick: Annulment: 100 Questions and Answers

BY FRANKLIN FREEMAN,
National Catholic Register
Posted 8/28/10 at 10:50 AM

Pete Vere and Jacqui Rapp, both experienced canon lawyers, have managed to write a positive book on what most would think a negative subject: annulment.

But the word “annulment,” Vere and Rapp point out in Annulment: 100 Questions and Answers for Catholics, is a misnomer, for “the Church does not annul marriages; she declares them to be invalid.”

“A declaration of invalidity is a statement of fact issued by the Catholic Church,” they write. “After carefully examining a couple’s broken relationship, the Church states that a marriage, as the Church defines marriage, never truly existed between them. The relationship may have enjoyed some of the external trappings of marriage: There may have been a big wedding followed by a common address and the birth of children. However, not all weddings bring about a marriage.”

And to understand this, one needs to understand what a marriage is in the eyes of the Church. Vere and Rapp, in the first half of the book, explore the teaching of the Church on marriage. Prior to the Second Vatican Council, they write, the Church viewed marriage more as a contract but after the Council, the Church understood marriage more as a covenant between a man and a woman, the goal of which is twofold: “the mutual welfare of the spouses (physical, emotional and spiritual) as well as openness to the procreation, welfare and education of children.”

Vere and Rapp also include a good discussion of how marriages should be prepared for and what a couple should do if their preparation lacks orthodox teaching.

Following this are chapters on impediments to marriage, questions about consent, and then two more chapters that examine the nitty-gritty of the annulment process. These are, for a layman, the hardest chapters to read because of all the technical terms involved, but the authors intersperse the legalese with stories of annulment cases, and these stories enliven the discussion, linking the legal terms and roles with real people.

At times, however, the authors trivialize the subject matter by attempts at humor that miss the mark. I, for one, found this distasteful, having grown up in a divorced household with a single mother.

Though it was outside the scope of the book, a brief discussion of the abuse of the annulment process in dioceses in the United States would also have been welcomed.

The authors end their book with a solid chapter on keeping your marriage together. They seem to me to be wise and true: Pray together, eat together, talk together, be kind, work with your differences, play together, hold hands, and practice Natural Family Planning.

All of which is common sense but hard to remember in what Vere and Rapp rightly call “today’s anti-family culture.”

Sounds like a winner.


The Waiting City

Lucy Smith
MercatorNet
August 30, 2010

Forget Julia Roberts doing meditation. This Australian movie will tell you so much more about prayer - and love.

The Waiting City is an exceptionally beautiful story about love, shot entirely on location in the vibrant city of Calcutta. Australian couple Ben and Fiona Simmons, played by Australian actors Joel Edgerton and Rahda Mitchell, travel to Calcutta to adopt a little girl from Mother Teresa’s orphanage. Fiona is a successful and hard-working lawyer, accurately described by Rahda as “acerbic”, and Ben is an aspiring musician who seems to have lost motivation in life. Arriving in Calcutta, they discover that the adoption has not yet been finalized and the waiting game begins, bringing the long-simmering tensions of their marriage to the boil. It is when they let go and immerse themselves in the intoxicating city that they start to learn what love genuinely means, discovering loves both old and new.

Written and directed by Australian Claire McCarthy (Skin, The Find, City Edge) the film will no doubt strike a chord with couples worldwide as adopting children, both in one’s own country and internationally, becomes increasingly difficult. McCarthy met a number of couples who had come to India to adopt a child while she was working as a volunteer for Mother Teresa’s nuns in the slums of Calcutta, and her interest in their stories began to grow. It was during this trip that she fell in love with India.

Both Rahda Mitchell, star of the Oscar nominated Finding Neverland and Pitch Black, and Joel Edgerton, star of the recently acclaimed Animal Kingdom and Star Wars Episodes: II and III, give stirring performances, vividly conveying the heartache involved in the adoption process and the vulnerabilities involved in loving. They are supported by a large and varied cast including rising Australian actress Isabel Lucas (Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen and Home and Away) as Scarlet, an old music industry friend of Ben’s.

However, the true stars of Waiting City are the people of Calcutta and the city itself. Shot in the streets and seen through eyes of its people the film matches the vibrancy of Slumdog Millionaire and the romance of Monsoon Wedding. Well-known Bollywood actors Samrat Chakrabarti (New York and Kissing Cousins) and Tilotamma Shome (Monsoon Wedding and Shadows of Time) merit notable mentions in the roles of Krishna and Sister Tessila respectively. Krishna is the local Indian who acts as a guide to the young couple, gradually becoming more and more involved in their story. Chakrabarti manages to combine comedic dexterity with profound insight in the character of Krishna, a remarkably difficult feat. It is through Krishna’s eyes that the people and city come alive for the audience. And it is when Ben and Fiona begin to see their problems through his eyes -- that is, begin to see the West through the eyes of the East -- that the story becomes really interesting. Sister Tessila is one of the nuns at the orphanage and McCarthy is at her best in drawing this character. Though a woman of few words, Sister Tessila teaches Ben and Fiona what it really means to love. Shome plays the role of this humble and wise woman with moving subtlety.

Those seeking the violence and dark emotions that are unfortunately characteristic of recent Australian cinema should look elsewhere. Not only is Waiting City completely free of violence, but at the end of it I had the refreshing experience of discovering that my will to live had not been mislaid along the way. In fact, while I would recommend taking a hanky along with you, I left the cinema feeling uplifted and enriched.

It is interesting to note that a significant cross-section of Indian audiences did not take a shine to recent Best Picture winner Slumdog Millionaire the way Western critics and audiences did. They bemoaned the unflattering representation of their society -- the depressing elements of the story as well as the explicit depictions of violence and sex, which are more at home in Hollywood than in cheerful Bollywood. And although Waiting City is mainly directed at Western audiences, I suspect that it will be more accessible to Indian audiences as a happier union of the two movie styles.

Increasingly, films are promoting India and travel abroad as a way to expand one’s spiritual horizons; the new Julia Roberts film, Eat, Pray, Love, based on the book of the same name by Elizabeth Gilbert, is a case in point. But, unlike such big budget Hollywood films and their trendy, token spirituality, Waiting City is a deep exploration of the richness of both Western (Catholicism) and Eastern spirituality. Above all, though, it is a story about love: a beautiful -- and at times hilarious -- reflection on marriage, what it means to love and the preciousness of children.

Rating: Parents and teachers are advised that the film is rated M, that there is one mild to medium sex scene and some mild language.

QURAN-INTERNATIONAL (UPDATED) Sep-10-2010 (790 words) With photos posted Sept. 9. xxxi

Threat to burn Quran has damaged US image worldwide, says ambassador

By Carol Glatz
Catholic News Service

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- A U.S. pastor's threat to burn copies of the Quran has damaged the image of the United States, said the U.S. ambassador to the Vatican.

"The deliberate destruction of any holy book is an abhorrent act," said the ambassador, Miguel H. Diaz.

Plans by a small Florida Pentecostal church to burn the Quran Sept. 11 represent "disrespectful acts" and in no way reflect "the sentiments of the American people or the U.S. government," he said in a written statement Sept. 10.

The ambassador's remarks came after the Florida pastor, the Rev. Terry Jones, announced he had called off the event, even though later he said he was going to "rethink" that decision.

"The U.S. government condemns the on-again, off-again plans" by the small evangelical group, Diaz said. "The mere threat by a pastor of a small Florida church has already damaged the image of the U.S."

Diaz's comments were the latest in a series of condemnations by international church leaders and officials.

Catholic bishops in Iraq and Pakistan joined a growing chorus of international religious leaders denouncing the planned burning.

Chaldean Catholic Bishop Shlemon Warduni, the auxiliary of Baghdad, told Catholic News Service the proposed act "is totally against the spirit of Christianity."

He said people in Iraq, particularly Muslims, are asking: "Why are the Christians doing this?"

Bishop Warduni said Rev. Jones, of the Dove World Outreach Center in Gainesville, Fla., "must know and understand the consequences for Christians all over the world: Violence brings violence, not peace."

Chaldean Archbishop Louis Sako of Kirkuk, Iraq, issued a statement about the burning planned for Sept. 11, which this year coincides with the three-day celebration of Eid al-Fitr, the end of Ramadan, the Muslim month of fasting.

"We condemn this act as irresponsible and immoral, an act of violence against the Islamic religion but also all religions," Archbishop Sako said. "The pastor's position is his own and does not in any way, shape or form represent the position of Christians.

"While we assure you of our solidarity in condemning this despicable act, we also believe that it is incumbent upon all of us to work together, hand in hand, to renounce fanaticism and violence, which constitute the greatest threat to religion," he said.

In a statement Sept. 9, the Pakistani bishops condemned the planned Quran burning and urged the U.S. government to stop it.

Archbishop Lawrence Saldana of Lahore, president of the Pakistan Catholic Bishops' Conference, "denounced it as (an) act of desecration that is totally contrary to the Christian teaching that stresses tolerance and respect for sacred books of other religions."

"I call upon the American government to stop this senseless and insane plan because it injures the feelings and sentiments of our Muslim brethren and will seriously damage interfaith relations and peace throughout the world, especially in Pakistan," he said.

The statement also pointed out that "this outrageous gesture has been unequivocally denounced by the Vatican and other world leaders."

In a Sept. 8 statement, the Vatican's Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue said the "deplorable acts of violence" of Sept. 11, 2001, "cannot be counteracted by an outrageous and grave gesture against a book considered sacred by a religious community."

In Lebanon, the Catholic Church and all the evangelical churches condemned "completely this attack against the Quran," Maronite Father Joseph Mouannes, secretary of the Commission for the Catholic Bishops of the Middle East, told Catholic News Service.

As Christians, Father Mouannes said, "we have to respect the beliefs of other religions and other societies. Our Gospel doesn't permit hate and condemnation against people. The core of the Gospel is respect and forgiveness."

"Imagine what damage he (Jones) can do for Christian minorities in the Islamic world," he added. "We have to think of all the Christian people in the Islamic world, especially, in the Middle East."

Father Mouannes echoed a warning by Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. military commander in Afghanistan, that the proposed Quran burning represents a very clear danger for American soldiers.

On Sept. 1, Cardinal Oswald Gracias of Mumbai, president of the Catholic Bishops' Conference of India, said the plan was a "totally insensitive and disrespectful act" and was "all the more shocking because such a campaign goes totally contrary to the teachings of Jesus Christ."

In Indonesia the same day, Bishop Petrus Mandagi of Amboina and Bishop Johannes Pujasumarta of Bandung met with Muslim, Christian, Buddhist, Confucian and Hindu leaders in Jakarta.

"We are deeply hurt by this group's plan to harm a religious symbol which is highly respected by Islam," the Indonesian bishops said in a statement at the meeting. "We strongly denounce the plan and any similar action committed by any party elsewhere."

- - -

Contributing to this story were Doreen Abi Raad in Beirut and Anto Akkara in Bangalore, India.

END