Fr. Hesburgh and Health Care

I've been so busy recently, I've barely had the chance to even read articles that could make their way to this weblog. Today, though, I saw a headline that was too provocative to pass up: Pelosi Invoked Fr. Hesburgh to Turn 'No' Health Bill Vote to 'Yes'.

This saddens, but doesn't surprise me. Though it is worse than I thought. The headline made me think she said something like "what would Fr. Hesburgh do?" but, it turns out, he actually was asked to make a phone call

Hesburgh was called in to persuade U.S. Rep. Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.) to vote for the health care bill despite the vast expansion of abortion funding embedded in it. Donnelly had been a member of the group of Democrats led by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), who opposed the bill without Hyde-amendment restrictions on abortion funding.
...

Elizabeth Shappell, Donnelly's press secretary, claims Hesburgh did not tell Donnelly how to vote but only advised him to "vote your conscience."

A well formed conscience should have been able to see clearly what the issues at hand were. In fact, it really would be the role of the episcopate and presbyteriate to help form the consciences of those considering this bill. There was no pressing need to pass this bill now, on that day, as it stood. After all, people weren't dying in the streets; the current system works, though perhaps imperfectly, and we thus should have done such a massive reform correctly, even if it took a little more time.

If only Fr. Hesburgh had forgotten all about the Land O' Lakes statement, and just told Congressman Donnelly to listen to the Bishops.

Benedict to Bishops on Secularism

Taken from Wednesday's address to the Bishops:

While it is true that this country is marked by a genuinely religious spirit, the subtle influence of secularism can nevertheless color the way people allow their faith to influence their behavior. Is it consistent to profess our beliefs in church on Sunday, and then during the week to promote business practices or medical procedures contrary to those beliefs? Is it consistent for practicing Catholics to ignore or exploit the poor and the marginalized, to promote sexual behavior contrary to Catholic moral teaching, or to adopt positions that contradict the right to life of every human being from conception to natural death? Any tendency to treat religion as a private matter must be resisted. Only when their faith permeates every aspect of their lives do Christians become truly open to the transforming power of the Gospel.

Just go for the throat, that seems to be the best policy here, no? In this election season, there is a lot of discussion about these issues. Many "Catholic" politicians try the "personally opposed" argument, or the "private beliefs" argument to justify their position on abortion or embryonic stem cell research, but this is clearly inconsistent.

Read that last line again. Wonderful. Thanks, Pope!

More to follow...

Ding Dong

A Roman Catholic priest is being fined 5,000 euros by municipal officials each time he rings his church bell for early morning Mass.

Municipal officials of Tilburg, 115 km south of Amsterdam, are responding to the complaints of residents about the bells ringing at 7:15 a.m. each day.

According to municipality spokesman Thomas Heesters, city officials urged Fr. Harm Schilder for months to stop ringing the early morning bell of the Holy Margarita Maria Church. But when the priest did not comply, the city warned that starting Aug. 16, he would be fined for every morning the bell sounds, reported The Associated Press.

Despite the threat, the bells rang out again Thursday and Friday.

''The council does not want to get involved in this - it's a house of prayer - but we have to take into account the feelings of local residents,'' Heesters was quoted as saying.

The first fine was to be delivered on Friday. If the priest refuses to pay, Heesters reportedly said, the municipality could send bailiffs to the church.

The Diocese of Den Bosch has asked the priest to stop the ringing the bell or take measures to make it quieter ''to prevent further escalation in the case.''

The parish website posted a statement, saying it is taking the complaint seriously and looking into whether it could install a smaller bell. “Legally, the parish has a right to ring the bell,” the statement said.

“People who are bothered by the bell should know that we pray for them in the Mass,” the message concluded.

The bells did not sound on Monday morning.

(Article)
If they think 7:15 is bad, they should be glad they don't ring the Angelus bells at 6, noon and 6.

Chimeras in real life

I first was aware of the term "Chimera" from some Anime that my roommate used to watch. The idea of an animal-human hybrid lives in the realm of fiction, and seems to have no place in reality.

Enter England. The English parliament has been considering removing a ban on creating such a being, but requiring that such an embryo must be destroyed within a couple weeks. Needless to say, many people worldwide are very much opposed to such legislation, the Church in particular.

Then, I read today that the position of the English Bishops is that if such a hybrid is produced, it should be given the rights of a human, and should be even allowed to be carried to term.

Human embryos injected with animal cells, or chimeras, should be accorded human status under proposals to be considered by the British Parliament in the fall, said the Catholic bishops of England and Wales.

They also said politicians should reconsider a proposed ban on the implantation of chimeras into women.

"In particular, it should not be a crime to transfer them, or other human embryos, to the body of the woman providing the ovum, in cases where a human ovum has been used to create them," the bishops said.

"Such a woman is the genetic mother, or partial mother, of the embryo; should she have a change of heart and wish to carry her child to term, she should not be prevented from doing so," they added.

In their submission, the bishops said that most of the procedures covered by the bill "should not be licensed under any circumstances," principally on the grounds that they violate human rights.

However, they said, "at very least, embryos with a preponderance of human genes should be assumed to be embryonic human beings and should be treated accordingly," they said.

Wow. I have no idea why anyone would even want to do such a thing, but I applaud the Church for taking the safe position. I haven't been reading news like I should, but I wonder if there has been something come out about cloning. I see cloning as little different than identical twinning, though wrong to do, it doesn't make the clone any less human. I heard a protestant apologist once say that he believes a clone would not have a soul. I would think the clone would have a soul, and therefore is fully human. A chimera would be at least part human, but I would think that it would not be truly human, maybe to the point of not gaining an eternal soul. But, we don't know, and really can't know, so must treat such a being as human, with all the dignity deserved.

I just hope we never have to find out.
-JG

Abortion Supporters Honored by Jesuits

In our next installment of the abortion supporting politician saga, surprise, another Jesuit university honors pro-abortion politicians at their commencement ceremony. (Article)

Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, delivered the commencement address at the Jesuit-run University of San Francisco on Saturday. The pro-abortion supporter spoke during the ceremony at the university’s McLaren College of Business.

At the same ceremony, the college honored former California lieutenant governor Leo T. McCarthy, also a pro-abortion supporter, posthumously.

In a May 17 letter faxed to the university’s president, Fr. Stephen Privett, Patrick Reilly, president of the Virginia-based Cardinal Newman Society, urged him to withdraw the Pelosi invitation and the McCarthy honor.

Archbishop George Niederauer of San Francisco also received an honorary degree during the commencement ceremony for his demonstration of “an extraordinary sense of social justice, a passionate concern for peace, and a commitment to nonviolence to achieve ethical goals.”

The Cardinal Newman Society has asked Archbishop Niederauer to boycott the ceremony if the university did not change its plans.

A quick search didn't find out that the Archbishop boycotted the ceremony, though he should have done something crazy like close the school down or something. That's his job as Bishop, to make sure the Catholics aren't led astray.

Why is it that Jesuits always screw up like this?

-JG

Even more on Excommunication and Politicians

In an interview with Time, a Honduran Bishop discussed the excommunication of pro-abortion politicians, in the next salvo of this debate. (From EWTN)

Cardinal Maradiaga was asked, “Do you agree with the Pope’s statement that pro-choice Catholic politicians merit excommunication?” The cardinal responded by saying: “It is canon law that everyone who works for abortion is excommunicated. It’s not something the Pope invented. If you favor abortion, you are outside the communion of the Church. And it was necessary to say that. There are people in Mexico saying I am Catholic and I support abortion rights. This is a contradiction in its very essence. As a teacher of the Church, the Pope has a responsibility of teaching when something happening is wrong.”

Later he was asked: “Do you agree with bishops who deny giving Holy Communion to these politicians?” The cardinal replied: “This is a different point. For who am I to deny Holy Communion to a person? I cannot. It’s in the tradition of moral theology that even if I know a person is living in grave sin, I cannot take a public action against him. It would be giving scandal to the person. Yes, he should not seek [communion], but I cannot deny it from him.”

Nevertheless, in statements to Carlos Polo, reproduced exclusively by the Catholic News Agency, Cardinal Maradiaga, who is in Aparecida participating in the V General Conference of the Latin American Bishops’ Council, said his comments to Time magazine should be reformulated “in light of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith teaches in its document, ‘Worthiness to Receive Communion’.”

“A politician who publicly supports abortion, he excommunicates himself. It’s not question of receiving Communion or not; he has already done serious harm to the communion of faith of the Church, to the communion of moral life, and therefore that person himself is doing an act that is inconsistent with what he says he believes,” the cardinal said.

“That is, we’re talking about a person who has become a broken-off branch of the tree of life of the Church, a dry branch that has lost its vital sap and is doing something that is a lie. One who is against life and who is clearly opposed to the message of the Lord Jesus, as is an abortion supporter, cannot be in Communion with Holy Mother Church,” he stated.

“Therefore, if one uses the desire to receive Communion as a justification, it is the worst manner of doing so, because one is doing an act that contradicts what one says he believes,” the cardinal said.

It looks to me like he was being corrected by his staffers, or the Vatican, or someone, based on canon law, which is very clear on the subject:

Can. 915 Those who have been excommunicated or interdicted after the imposition or declaration of the penalty and others obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to holy communion.

Here, the phrase "obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin" is the operative phrase. If their sin is grave (supporting abortion) and manifest (publicly, for instance, in a debate or a vote in congress), and they are obstinate (won't change their mind after warning them), they can, and indeed should be denied communion. This doesn't even touch on the formal excommunication either, which I feel should happen as well.

Yet, I don't think the Eucharist should be used as a political pawn. These politicians shouldn't seek the sacrament because they are not in a state of grace. If it comes to it, they should be denied communion. They also should be formally excommunicated, so there is no question. This should fall to the local bishops, and the National conferences should instruct them to act.

-JG

Democrats Angry with the Pope

Big surprise, but Democrats in America are upset with the recent comments made by Pope Benedict about politicians who support abortion. (Article) (Another)

Eighteen Democratic members of the US House of Representatives have joined in criticizing Pope Benedict XVI (bio - news) for his statement that pro-abortion politicians should not receive Communion.

During a conversation with reporters on May 9, as he was flying to Brazil, the Holy Father had said that he fully supported the decision of some Mexican bishops to bar politicians from receiving the Eucharist after the lawmakers voted to legalize abortion in Mexico City. The Mexican bishops, the Pope said, had "simply announced to the public what is stipulated by the law of the Church."

The Bishops of the United States have not had the backbone to say this, although this is really the policy of the Church. This is probably getting some of these abortion supporting "Catholic" politicians a little nervous. I think some of the more moderate Catholics would think twice about voting for a formally excommunicated politician, maybe I'm wrong.

But the Democratic legislators, led by Rep. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut, charged that the Pope's stand (and by implication the laws of the Church) "offend the very nature of the American experiment."

A move to exclude pro-abortion legislators from receiving Communion would be "a great disservice to the centuries of good work the Church has done," the 18 Congressmen argued.

So, formally excommunicating those who, "by virtue of their social or political position, must make decisions regarding fundamental values, such as respect for human life, its defence from conception to natural death, the family built upon marriage between a man and a woman, the freedom to educate one's children and the promotion of the common good in all its forms." (SC 83)

A great disservice? How about a great disservice to the Truth?

Advancing respect for life and for the dignity of every human being is, as our church has taught us, our own life’s mission. As we said in our Statement of Principles, ‘We envision a world in which every child belongs to a loving family and agree with the Catholic Church about the value of human life and the undesirability of abortion – we do not celebrate its practice. Each of us is committed to reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies and creating an environment with policies that encourage pregnancies to be carried to term.’ That is precisely what some of us are doing with our initiative ‘The Reducing the Need for Abortion and Supporting Parents Act’ – which includes policies that promote alternatives to abortion, such as adoption, improve access to children’s healthcare and child care, as well as encourage paternal and maternal responsibility.

Huh? I'm glad they at least mentioned adoption, but I don't understand why that's not the primary option considered. If they indeed "agree with the Catholic Church about the value of human life..." they could never support abortion. And, what's all this about being committed to stopping unwanted pregnancies? Think they do that by telling people to not have sex? I'm sure not, I'm sure it's contraception.

You can read the whole statement, if you'd like, but I'm sure you'll be as disappointed as I am.

-JG

Pope gives interview on plane

As the Pope is making his way to Brazil, he spent 25 minutes answering questions on the airplane with reporters, CNS reports.

In remarks about the recent legalization of abortion in Mexico, the pope appeared to support Mexican church leaders who held out the possibility of excommunication for Catholic legislators who voted for the legislation.

Asked whether he agreed with the excommunication penalty, the pope answered: "Yes, these excommunications were not something arbitrary, but are foreseen by the Code (of Canon Law). It is simply part of church law that the killing of an innocent baby is incompatible with being in communion with the body of Christ," he said.

Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi, the Vatican spokesman, told reporters that the pope was not announcing a new policy on Catholic politicians. He also noted that the Mexican bishops had not announced the excommunication of anyone.

"And if the bishops haven't excommunicated anyone, it's not that the pope wants to do so," Father Lombardi said.

He said the pope was only reiterating the teaching that Catholic legislators who promote initiatives like the legalization of abortion exclude themselves from the conditions needed to participate fully in the Eucharist.

I recalled reading a while back when the Mexican Bishops' spokesman said "any baptized assembly members will automatically be excommunicated and therefore be excluded from the Catholic Church," and thinking "too bad it's not true". The canon law in question is generally interpreted to only include those who actually procure or commit abortion. The Pope seems to be opening the way to change that interpretation, or at the very least, he is supporting the Mexican Bishops.

Wouldn't it be fun to be able to be part of one of these press conferences?

-JG

More on politicians in the UK

Archbishop Mario Conti of Glasgow has come out publicly, strongly urging lawmakers to follow natural law.

He said: "Moral truth is by its nature a reality which cannot be denied or deconstructed without serious consequences for the well-being of society. Indeed Pope Benedict insists on this in his new apostolic exhortation, 'Sacramentum Caritatis.'

"Recognizing the truth about humanity is, he writes, 'especially incumbent upon those who, by virtue of their social or political position, must make decisions regarding fundamental values, such as respect for human life, its defense from conception to natural death, the family built upon marriage between a man and a woman, the freedom to educate one's children and the promotion of the common good in all its forms.'

"'These values,' the Pope said, 'are not negotiable.'"

Archbishop Conti added: "This must be another way of saying that these values form the bedrock of society.

"A society which, on the other hand, builds itself on the untested ground of new ideologies or the shifting sands of liberal -- or perhaps I should say illiberal -- opinion is doomed to failure."

All I can say is this: Bravo! It's about time we have Bishops who are willing to take a stand and tell it like it is. This is a demonstration of the power of an Apostolic Exhortation. Already now the actions exhorted by the Pope are being put into action. Let us hope and pray that more of our Bishops will be willing to take such a stand.