Punditry

AMDG notes that the USCCB’s site is listing the Call to Action conference on their November Calendar.

November 3-5 Call to Action National Conference: “Rise Up People of God,” Milwaukee, WI. Contact Linda Pieczynski, (630) 323-6924.

This year one of their sessions include:

Roman Catholic Women Priests Celebrate Eucharist
Roman Catholic Women Priests invite us to a Eucharistic liturgy in which women, equal and sacred symbols of the Roman Catholic Chuch <sic>, celebrate in an inclusive manner the Sacred Meal of Our Faith. They invite us to join them and “discover the future alive in the present.” Facilitating this liturgy will be six ordained R.C. Women Priests, pictured below: Bridget Mary Meehan of Global Ministries University; Eileen M. DiFranco of Philadelphia; Joan Clark Houk of Pittsburgh; Kathleen Strack Kunster, serving a small community in California; Regina Nicolosi of Red Wing, Minn., a nursing home chaplain; and Kathy Sullivan Vandenberg. There are also two ordained R.C. women deacons: Juanita Cordero, a liturgist, and Mary Ellen Robertson, a hospice chaplain. Sun., 7:45 AM (13.07)

What is interesting is that this event is not listed on their regular calendar. Also no other Catholic conferences are listed. Only Call to Actions out of all the hundreds of conferences each years gets a mention.

The USCCB gives contact information for Linda Pieczynski, the spokeswoman of Call to Action. Before Pope John Paul II died she said "What we are trying to do is survive and hold on until [the next pope]." Boy would I have liked to see her face when Pope Benedict was elected. After his election she said:

"Progressive Catholics are closely watching the first actions of the newly elected Pope Benedict XVI," stated Linda Pieczynski, the national spokesperson for Call To Action (CTA), the nation’s largest progressive Catholic reform group. She said, "The Spirit leads the church, which is the people of God, no matter who is Pope. Some issues in the Church just won’t go away. We still feel called to raise our issues even if the current Pope will not. Given our knowledge of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger’s prior positions as the head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, formerly the office of the notorious Holy Inquisition, we are guarded in our expectation that he will address any of the important changes we have called for."

Pieczynski continued, "Under Ratzinger’s leadership and with his approval, the discussion of women’s ordination has been forbidden; married priesthood is not under consideration; people who have ministered to the gay and lesbian community have been silenced; and theologians who have written about the good in other religions have been investigated. He is also personally responsible for derailing the canonical lawsuit filed by the victims of Fr. Maciel, former head of the Legionaries of Christ, an alleged serial pedophile. Finally, he led an effort for two decades to disempower national conferences of bishops, which conflicts with Vatican II’s principle of collegiality."

Update: The calendar item has now been removed. Hopefully this was addressed with whatever staffer thougtht this was worthy in the first place.

Bureaucracies are like dinosaurs because the bigger they get the smaller their brains are. Case in point is the USCCB.

Previously the USCCB went after the Verbum Domini podcast which broadcast the daily readings from the New American Bible and demanded that he stop using the NAB. Great move against a podcast listened to by people who are unable to attend Mass. They subsequently put on their site.

Permission may not be granted to post or podcast the complete NAB (or complete books of the NAB) or the daily or Sunday readings.

Now since the USCCB is the copyright holder of the NAB they certainly have the legal right to defend their copyright. It is also understandable how they might want to prevent the misuse of this translation (though in this case the translators of the NAB already did that). It seems to me reasonable that that they should grant permission to a podcast only after an investigation as to how it is used. Instead they just have a blanket NO. Go out into the whole world and spread the Gospel unless of course it has been copyrighted by the USCCB.

Now Jeff Mirus of Catholic Culture reports that the USCCB is now going after websites that post USCCB documents.

We used to include many significant documents in our database from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, but not any more. The USCCB goes after web sites which make use of USCCB documents, threatening legal action for copyright violations. This policy is in marked contrast to that of the Vatican, which enforces copyrights only to prevent others from releasing advance copies of documents before their official promulgation dates.

Many organizations, including Trinity Communications, have received letters from the USCCB listing the unauthorized documents displayed on their web sites, and requesting immediate removal. USCCB staff actually track this stuff down. Clearly this is within the USCCB’s rights under copyright law, but just as clearly it is a short-sighted policy which significantly limits the circulation of episcopal documents. If other web sites were allowed to post them, these documents would be substantially more widely read among the Catholic faithful.

Mark Shea says in response:

One of their many stupid, counter-productive, turf-guarding policies is to criminalize the use of USCCB documents (including the Catechism) and to waste our tithe money assigning staff to track down those nefarious Catholics out on the web who, like, quote the Catechism. One almost gets the impression the USCCB doesn’t *want* people to know what the Church teaches.

A committed Christian said today she planned to take legal action against her employers British Airways after the airline ruled that displaying her crucifix breached uniform rules

Heathrow check-in worker Nadia Eweida was sent home after refusing to remove the crucifix which breached BA’s dress code.

Note to Media: A crucifix has a corpus of Christ on it.

Her treatment by BA – which styles itself as the "world’s favourite airline" – brought condemnation both from Christian groups and members of other faiths last night.

BA’s chief executive Willie Walsh has upheld the action against Miss Eweida for failing to comply with "uniform regulations" despite himself coming under fire recently for failing to wear a tie.

Miss Eweida, who has an unblemished record during seven years at BA, is suing her employer for religious discrimination after being suspended from work without pay for two weeks.

She said her treatment was all the more extraordinary as she and fellow employees had just undergone "diversity training" – including receiving advice from pressure group Stonewall on how to treat gays and lesbians in the workplace.

I just knew I would find the next bit of information in the aticle.

It makes exceptions for Muslim and Sikh minorities by allowing them to wear hijabs and turbans.

Under rules drawn up by BA’s ‘diversity team’ and ‘uniform committee’, Sikh employees can even wear the traditional iron bangle – even though this would usually be classed as jewellery – while Muslim workers are also allowed prayer breaks during work time.

Via TheWorld…IMHO

A Catholic priest has become the latest homeowner to run afoul of the Westchase homeowners association.

Father Jeff Johnston appeared before the board Thursday night after he was told to remove a Celtic cross from near his door in the northwestern Hillsborough County community. His appeal was denied.

Board members told Johnston he was being cited under a section of the community’s deed restrictions that deals with sculptures that might be offensive to race or religion. Johnston’s attorney, Noel Flasterstein, told the board the cross was a symbol of national heritage. He questioned whether people would be allowed to have Nativity scenes at Christmas if the rules were applied uniformly.

"While it is a Celtic cross, it certainly is a Christian symbol," Johnston said. "It is not a garden ornament; it’s by the front door."

In March, Westchase resident Stacey Kelly clashed with the community association after posting a 2-foot-tall "Support Our Troops" sign in her front yard. It was a tribute to her husband, David, an Army private serving in Iraq. Three months later, she was cited for a pair of ceramic angels that had adorned her yard for five years.

If you have ever donated money to any Catholic organization you are sure to get tons of mail from religious orders soliciting donations. Often included in these letters are religious medals, address stamps, and sometimes Rosaries or even statues. When we get these my wife will ask me to check them out to see if they are worth supporting. Normally the answer turns out be be no. Today I received one from a order of Dominican sisters. The letter had the picture of two nuns in their habit at the top of the letterhead along with a nice graphic of St. Joseph.

I found their web site and was not surprised to find that not one of the pictures of the sisters showed them wearing a Dominican habit. I found one of the women from the letterhead, though she was also sans habit. The pictures of them at Mass showed the same thing. A review of the website revealed no religious art and St. Joseph was nowhere to be found. The links of course did not include the Vatican and were mainly to questionable retreat houses. The pending social justice issue of the day appears to be genetically engineered crops.

I have found many of these fund raising letters to be highly deceptive They promote themselves as looking like a traditional Catholic order in their letters. A religious bait and switch. They send traditional devotional items and prayers, but these groups themselves practice devotions more suited for new agers. When religious orders present a lie to gain donations, they have certainly jumped the shark. We have unfortunately come quite use to deceptive advertisement, it is a sad day when religious orders resort to the same.

The British Broadcasting Company (BBC) recently broadcast a segment “Sex Crimes and the Vatican” that raised again the existence and intent of what had been a secret 1962 Church document Crimen Sollicitationis. Decades later, a related 2001 Vatican document came to light, “Letter Explains New Norms for Vatican Handling of Certain Grave Offenses”. Together the documents raised many questions as to whether or not the Vatican had a standing policy of secrecy when it was advised of clergy sexual abuse.

This was in the latest VOTF newsletter. I guess they didn’t get the memo that this story was debunked back in 2003 when it initially appeared. So I guess VOTF is just as behind the times as the BBC and it really shows the character of VOTF that they accept it immediately without doing any fact checking. Ed Peters had a good post on this BBC hit job earlier this month.

The mother of a seventh-grader at Dwight D. Eisenhower Middle School has filed a lawsuit against administrators at the South Laurel school, claiming her daughter was barred from reading the Bible during lunch period and threatened with punishment if she did it again.

In her complaint, filed Sept. 29, Maryann Mangum of Laurel, the grandmother and adoptive mother of 13-year-old Amber Mangum, claimed the administrators’ actions were a violation of Amber’s First Amendment rights and of the school system’s own policy.

"Contrary to the fundamental liberties enshrined in the United States and Maryland Constitutions, Amber Mangum was ordered, under threat of disciplinary action, to cease reading her personal Bible during her lunch period," the lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Greenbelt, states.

"Despite requests that the order be withdrawn, the Defendants have refused to renounce the warning that Amber will be disciplined if she reads her Bible at school."

The incident that sparked the lawsuit occurred Sept. 14, when Amber Mangum was reading her Bible during lunch period. According to the lawsuit, students at Eisenhower often read books during lunch period, and Amber "is a Christian and takes great comfort in reading the Bible."

But when Assistant Principal Jeanette Rainey saw what Amber was doing, the lawsuit states, she informed the student that reading the Bible violated school policy and that if she did it again, she would be disciplined.

Maybe we need a new line of Bible covers. Kind of like hiding comic books within the cover of a magazine. In this case the perfect fake cover would be a Koran cover. You just know students wouldn’t be bothered if it looked like they were reading a Koran. Same goes for people with Bibles out in the open at work that get harassed about it.

Baker sent a letter to school administrators complaining about their actions, and attaching a copy of the Prince George’s County school system’s administrative procedures, which state: "Students may read their Bibles or other scriptures, say grace before meals, and pray before tests to the same extent they may engage in comparable, non-disruptive activities."

When administrators did not respond to the letter, the lawsuit states, Maryann Mangum, at the suggestion of a friend from church, contacted the Rutherford Institute, a Charlottesville, Va.-based, civil liberties organization that handles cases involving religious liberties.

Rutherford President John Whitehead said he also sent a letter to school administrators, telling them their policy was a violation of civil rights and asking them to allow Amber to read her Bible.

When administrators did not respond, he said, attorneys filed the lawsuit.

Here it is, reason #666, on why the USCCB is a highly flawed institution filled with the (unholy) Spirit of Vatican II:

This past Sunday in the Novus Ordo US Lectionary (both a USCCB invention), the Bible verse used in the Gospel was the Gospel of St. Mark 9:35 (36)…

RSV (Catholic Edition)
And he took a child, and put him in the midst of them; and taking him in his arms, he said to them,

Douay-Rheims
And taking a child, he set him in the midst of them. Whom when he had embraced, he saith to them:

NAB
Taking a child he placed it in their midst, and putting his arms around it he said to them,

Does anyone, especially Catholics, ever refer to a baby as an "it"?
[Via CVSTOS FIDEI]

Before I knew better I made the mistake of picking up the NAB Study Bible. I remember really being happy obtaining a Catholic study Bible. That happiness did not last very long as I read the study notes. I am convinced these study notes were written by Statler & Waldorf, the two critics on the balcony from The Muppet Show. It seemed their whole purpose was skepticism and undermining the Biblical text, a kind of Biblical fisking. Not that all of the notes were this way, but they definitely steered that way. Lousy translation, lousy notes. What a package.

Rich Leonardi has an excellent post on the document that provides obfuscation and cover for pro-abortion politicians called "Voting for the Common Good." It is of course no surprise that this document put out "Catholic in Alliance for the Common Good" (CACG) a group headed up by Alexia Kelley who in 2004 worked as a religion advisor to John Kerry in the closing weeks of his campaign.

Now it is quite understandable why such a voting guide would be put out to counteract the Voters Guide For Serious Catholics put out by Catholic Answers. That voters guide was written by Jimmy Akin and it certainly bears the stamp of his work. What I like most about Jimmy is that he is extremely careful in the statements he makes. When he states a position of the Church you can be sure that it is truly what the Church teaches and not an admixture of his own opinion. He is very careful in not making statements say more than they truly do. The same can not be said for whoever is the author of this new voter’s guide that is not a representation of Catholic teaching, but pure spin.

I am considering legal action against CAGC, since their voters guide surely got inspiration from my "Voters Guide for Cafeteria Catholics."

I find all the head lines "Married archbishop rejects Vatican’s excommunication" to be rather dumb. Exactly when in the history of the Church did anybody ever accept an excommunication? It makes it sound like excommunications are served like subpoenas, except with a yes/no block on it to be filled out as to whether you accept it or not. People are excommunicated in the first place because there was something wrong with their judgment, so whether they accept it or not just does not matter.

Now there have been plenty of those who were excommunicated and in a way did accept it. They came to see that they were wrong and repented of their disobedience. You have to wonder though in the modern climate just how effective an excommunication is compared to in the past. It is not exactly a mark of Cain to many people and might even be considered by some as a reason to approve of a person. It is harder for someone to repent of a sin when they are supported by so many.

News coverage has often be laughable in describing excommunication as kicking somebody out of the Church or as a declaration that somebody is no longer Catholic or within the Catholic Church. You won’t hear that it is a medicinal and spiritual penalty that bars a person from the sacraments until they have repented and the penalty has been lifted.

But by refusing to accept the inevitability of student sexual activity and stubbornly adhering to antiquated Church doctrine, the university is failing its students in its responsibility to promote sexual health.

If I was to ask you which university was being referred to, I wonder how many would come up with Georgetown. Stubbornly adhering to Church doctrine and Georgetown are not exactly worlds I would expect to appear in the same sentence. The odds of such an occurrence I would normally rate at a number with a very high value exponent. That Georgetown has not bought into the condoms for students mentality is positive indeed.

The Trojan Sexual Health Report Card gave Georgetown a 1.1 on "sexual" health. Yale got a perfect 4.0 and Notre Dame and Brigham Young got 0.0’s. I remember a time when a corporate sponsored survey on the availability of their products might have gotten sneers from students. Now it is just accepted wholesale and becomes the subject of a student newspaper.

Georgetown does not have to abandon its moral ideals and condone premarital sex, but in light of the health risks involved in the absence of contraception and STI testing, it is time for the university to accept responsible sex as the lesser evil.

So how exactly would an evil ever be described as responsible? Evil is always irresponsible.