Punditry

It is not exactly difficult to point out liberal bias in the L.A. Times, but Bill Donahue uncovers a perfect case of it. Cardinal Mahoney spoke out forcibly during Mass about Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, a Catholic, for supporting a bill to allow doctor-assisted suicide in the state of California

Los Angeles Times writer George Skelton criticized the Cardinal in his April 5 column. In it, he referred to the Catholic Church as “looking like an ugly old political attack dog.” He also accused the Cardinal of violating the American separation of church and state and called for “a bill to reexamine the tax-exempt status of church property.”

Now to rewind just over a year ago the same writer praised the Cardinal.

He noted how an editorial in the Los Angeles Times on March 2, 2006, commended Cardinal Mahony for “reinforcing the right of religious leaders to speak out on the moral ramifications of political issues.” The issue that Cardinal Mahony addressed then was immigration.

We hear a lot of sturm and drang that President Bush is "anti-science" because of his opposition to human cloning and full federal funding of destroying embryos for ESCR. But these positions don’t make the President anti-science: That dispute is about ethics. People can agree or disagree about the ethics, but one can be–as I am–both pro science and anti-human cloning.

There is a bill now before the Senate that will test whether the pro-ESCR Democrats are also pro-science. S.30, the "Hope Offered through Principled and Ethical Stem Cell Research" would federally fund "alternatives" to destructive ESCR, such as "reprogramming," in which an ordinary body cell may be reverted back to its embryonic stem cell state–a feat accomplished already in mice.

This bill passed unanimously in the U.S. Senate last year and in the House, but not with a "super majority" needed to clear a procedural hurdle. Unfortunately, S. 30 is being held hostage to the ESCR bill–much like the umbilical cord blood banking bill was held up for years before finally passing. But whether or not one supports or opposes traditional ESCR, there is no substantial reason to oppose S. 30, given the dearth of ethical controversy and the great scientific potential. (Ian Wilmut, of Dolly fame, has stated he believes reprogramming will be usable for medical therapies before human cloning.) If the Democrats who control the Congress shoot down this bill, it won’t be because of ethical considerations but pure politics, and a desire to thwart one avenue of stem cell experiments in order to boost another. And that would be anti-science.

	Jester Hat Tip:	Wesley J. Smith

The anti-science meme has been used more and more at anybody who is against cloning or ESCR and of course the term fundamentalist is also being bandied about in this relation. You truth is that everybody believes ethical limits need to be put on research and what can be scientifically possible. The same people that would call Bush and others anti-science for wanting to restrict research in some area often will want restrictions placed on genetic modification of food (so called Frankenfoods), missile shield testing to totally go away, and animal testing to stop.

This is just another sign of the breakdown of debate that instead of proponents of something making their case, they instead use ridiculous labels to minimize the other side. Anti-science, anti-choice are just of few of the terms used so that they don’t have to actually debate what they disagree with.

TALLAHASSEE, Florida (CNN) — Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani told CNN Wednesday he supports public funding for some abortions, a position he advocated as mayor and one that will likely put the GOP presidential candidate at odds with social conservatives in his party.

"Ultimately, it’s a constitutional right, and therefore if it’s a constitutional right, ultimately, even if you do it on a state by state basis, you have to make sure people are protected," Giuliani said in an interview with CNN’s Dana Bash in Florida’s capital city.

A video clip of the then-mayoral candidate issuing a similar declaration in 1989 in a speech to the "Women’s Coalition" appeared recently on the Internet.

"There must be public funding for abortions for poor women," Giuliani says in the speech that is posted on the video sharing site YouTube. "We cannot deny any woman the right to make her own decisions about abortion."

When asked directly Wednesday if he still supported the use of public funding for abortions, Giuliani said "Yes."

"If it would deprive someone of a constitutional right," he explained, "If that’s the status of the law, yes."

I wonder how anybody can say that Rudy would appoint judges who are strict constructionalists when he can call abortion a constitutional right. Does he believe that a strict contructionalist sees abortion "rights" in the Constitution? It must be all those damn penumbras floating around the Constitution that make people see this.

Though at least he hasn’t had some fake conversion to the pro-life cause and while I can appreciate his honesty it certainly does not change the fact that someone so wrong on so many moral issues isn’t going to make good moral decisions as President.

	Jester Hat Tip:	Publius

The AP (no surprise) really does a disservice to John Billings.

Founder of contraceptive method dies

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

MELBOURNE, Australia — John Billings, the founder of a natural contraception method that won support among Catholics, has died, a colleague said Tuesday. He was 89.

Billings died late Sunday at a Melbourne retirement home, said Marian Corkill, director of the World Organization Ovulation Method Billings International, better known as WOOMB.

Billings and his wife Evelyn pioneered the Billings Ovulation Method in the 1950s – a technique that helps women identify their fertile and non-fertile states based on their menstrual cycle.

In the Billings method, a woman can determine when she is fertile based on an examination of her cervical mucus, as opposed to the rhythm method, which is based on past menstrual cycles.

Billings, a staunch Catholic and father of nine, always had the support of his church, which opposes contraceptive devises such as condoms and the pill that revolutionized birth control a decade later. Critics of the Billings method argue the church supported it because of its relatively high failure rate, which earned it the nickname "Vatican Roulette."

Well I guess you just can’t expect for the AP or pretty much any news source to be able to differentiate between abstinence during times of fertility and something that is actually and actively contraceptive.

Mukesh Haikerwal, president of the Australian Medical Association, said the method’s failure rate was three in 100, compared to one in 100 for condoms, one in 1,000 for the pill and one in 10,000 for implanted devices

1 and 100 as a failure rate for condoms is definitely not the normal statistic. Even Planned Parenthood’s Guttmacher Institute mentions failure rates between three and seven percent.

Another article says Rhythm method pioneer dies in Melbourne. Yes it is a good thing the MSM has editors so they don’t make blunders like this.

Of course not mentioned in the fact that the Billings Ovulation Method can be used to help couples who are having difficulties to conceive. But then that wouldn’t fit the NFP is contraception meme.

Yesterday I joked that it was too bad we didn’t’ trade Bishop Hubbard for Bishop Herzog in the Diocese of Albany. Today I received the VOTF newsletter praising a new program by Bishop Hubbard "Called to BE Church." You know right off it VOTF is praising it that it is really not worthwhile and reading the program you can see exactly why the bishop is putting all his eggs in Pastoral Associates to run parishes because of their priest shortage.

At the Called to BE Church page the Bishop has a document called The Mission of the Contemporary Parish [PDF] which I think is a quite useful document. That is if you do exactly the opposite of what the document calls for in regards to parish life. I guess salvation and forgiveness of sins has nothing to do with parish life. And the Eucharist is hardly mentioned except in regards in EEM’s. Prayer is only mentioned in the context of Ecumenism.

I thought to myself, "What more could people be looking for in a parish liturgy?" A welcoming environment; a well-choreographed
service; maximum lay involvement, wonderful music, and a homily that informed, challenged and
pulled all the elements of the liturgy in a cohesive
whole. Yet the pews were only half filled, the collections in the parish had gone flat and within six months the school, which had been such a
viable part of the parish since its inception in the late 1950s, had closed its doors.

I think this paragraph is a perfect example of how he just does not get it especially since in other parts of the document he calls contemporary music wonderful music. How do you judge maximum lay involvement? For me that we be that people were actively praying with the Mass, something that would be rather hard to determine. Obviously he has a different idea of what maximum lay involvement means and that is people physically doing something.

…for opportunities to partner ecumenically
in addressing the great social issues of our day: war, terrorism, economic disparity both nationally
and globally, family breakdown, sexual and
environmental exploitation and gender identity, as
well as the spiritual ills of hedonism, individual-
ism, consumerism and secularism that can corrupt
the spirit and the progress of understanding life’s
ultimate meaning and fulfillment.

Not surprisingly something seems to be missing from his list of "great social issues of our day", of course abortion. Though he does mention abortion and embryonic stem-cell research latter in a dismissive way when he says why should they be the only moral issues? He does manage to mention "zoning ordinances" when it comes to social justice issues though. He also manages to quote the usual suspects such as Peter Steinfels and Teilhard de
Chardin. Basically he just doesn’t have a clue as to how to revive parish life. He has been the Bishop of Albany since 1977 and somehow wonders how parish life under his care is not what it should be.

PARIS (AP) — Sister Marie-Simon-Pierre is the French nun whose testimony of a mystery cure from Parkinson’s disease will likely be accepted as the miracle the Vatican needs to beatify Pope John Paul II, an official at the Paris maternity hospital where she works said Wednesday.

The identity of the nun has been one of the Catholic Church’s most closely guarded secrets. The nun says that she was cured of Parkinson’s after she and her community of nuns prayed to John Paul.

The nun, a member of the ‘‘Congregation of Little Sisters of Catholic Motherhood’’ in Aix-en-Provence in southeast France, works at the Sainte-Felicite hospital in Paris, the official said on condition of anonymity because an official announcement was expected Sunday.

In Rome, Monsignor Slawomir Oder, the Polish cleric spearheading the John Paul’s beatification cause, said the bishop in the woman’s diocese would announce details about her case during his Palm Sunday Mass this weekend.

French newspaper Le Figaro, in an unsourced report late Wednesday on its Web site, first identified the nun by name, saying she was 45 years old.

The nun is traveling to Rome for ceremonies Monday marking the second anniversary of the pontiff’s death and the closure of a church investigation into his life which began after chants of ‘‘Santo Subito!’’ or ‘‘Sainthood Now!’’ erupted during John Paul’s 2005 funeral.

I do find the common sentence "Catholic Church’s most closely guarded secrets" in news articles on this story to be rather funny. Just where are those albino monk assassin when you need them to help us keep our secrets. No mention has been made as to why they might want to keep the identity hidden to prevent interference in the life of this nun. This is often the case such as with Saint Catherine Labore Saint Faustina that even the other nuns in their convent did not know about what was going on in their lives.

Carl Olson comments on and list many of the newstories covering Pope Benedicts XVI brief mention of Hell while celebrating Mass at the Parish of St. Felicity and Martyred Sons in the Diocese of Rome. The following is one of the dumber commentaries.

POPE BENEDICT XVI has reiterated the existence of Hell and condemned society for not talking about eternal damnation enough.

A furious Pope Benedict unleashed a bitter attack during a sermon while on a visit to a parish church and said: "Hell exists and there is eternal punishment for those who sin and do not repent."

Sounding "more of a parish priest than a Pope" the leader of the world’s one billion Roman Catholics added: "The problem today is society does not talk about Hell. It’s as if it did not exist, but it does."

Pope Benedict unleashed his fury during a visit to the tiny parish church of St Felicity and the Martyr Children at Fidene on the outskirts of Rome, in his capacity as bishop of the Italian capital.

One churchgoer said: "The Holy Father was really having a go. It was a typical fire-and-brimstone sermon that you would have expected from a parish priest years ago."

They forgot to say that "smoke was coming out of his ears" as he said this and that he was shaking his fist for emphasis. The scandal though is not what the pope said, but that it is even news in the first place. His mentioning of Hell only highlights its almost complete mention from most homilies. For me the doctrine of Hell is only more proof of God’s great love for us. That he has given us free will so that we can choose to be with him eternity or to reject him for eternity. I think the idea that no matter what we do or want choose and still end up in the Beatific Vision to be much scarier than Hell. If we can’t reject his love than we are just robots thinking we have free will all being corralled into the same direction.

Marquette, Mar 27, 2007 (CNA) – Marquette University should stop "hiding behind false ideas of tenure and academic freedom" and dismiss Dan Maguire, whose ideas are inconsistent with the Church’s teachings on contraception, abortion and marriage, said Fr. Thomas Euteneuer, president of Human Life International.

Maguire, a theology professor and ex-priest, recently distributed pamphlets, stating that the Catholic Church’s teachings on these three issues are optional and that there is no clear Catholic position on them.

The U.S. bishops’ doctrine committee issued a statement last week, rebuking Maguire for propagating his views, which run counter to Church teaching. Fr. Euteneuer applauded the bishops for issuing a formal and public statement on the matter.

"I am very heartened that the bishops of the committee finally addressed an erroneous model of moral theology that dissenting theologians have used for decades to mislead the faithful," Fr. Euteneuer said, referencing the model which claims certain central moral teachings of the Church are “optional” when they are not.

This idea wrongly states that the opinions of theologians are somehow equal with the Magisterium, the priest explained.

Last fall, Human Life International awarded Maguire, who is divorced and remarried, its “Millstone Award” for his advocacy of abortion, contraception, and same-sex marriage. The award’s title refers to the fate of those who mislead the innocent, as spoken by Jesus in Mt 18:6.

Funny though how in Catholic universities tenure has become the eight sacrament. You are a professor forever according to the order of academia. That the sacraments of Holy Orders and Marriage can be ditched if inconvenient but tenure is held sacrosanct as a permanent seal and that a ontological change has occurred in the person where the sacrament of tenure has been conferred.

It would be rather ironic if he was actually fired and ex-priest and divorced and remarried Maquire were to complain that they broke their promise towards him.

Though the chances of this happening are rather small. If I had a million dollars for every Jesuit institution in the States who implemented Ex Corde Ecclesiae I would still be broke.

Though the Maquire case does open up some interesting questions. I have read some grumbling that the USCCB should do more than just issue the statement they made about his writings. The problem of course is that the USCCB has no authority, as far as I know, when it comes to ecclesiastical discipline. That would belong primarily to Archbishop Dolan. The bishops authority over a nominal Catholic institution seems to be more theoretical then something that has much effect. If they aren’t going to listen to the magisterium, they are not exactly going to listen to a bishop that is in union with the pope and the magisterium. The bishop could of course excommunicate him if he saw that that was the right course.

Jeff Mirus has an interesting article on How Traditionalists and Modernists Are Alike which I mostly agree with. Though I would substitute the term traditionalist with radical traditionalist because there are many who call themselves traditionalist who don’t say stupid things like the new order of Mass is invalid. I have said before that modernism and radical traditionalism are really both sides of the same coin of dissent and Jeff Mirus takes this much further in giving some concrete examples of the similarities.

L.A. Catholic notes a major bit of irony in Cardinal Mahony celebrating a "Cesar Chavez Mass" basically for illegal immigrants. Chavez was as anti-illegal immigrant as they come and he would make Tom Tancredo seem liberal on the subject by comparison.