Why Does Cameron Infantilize Natives?
Big Hollywood
by Kurt Schlichter
There’s no hiding that Avatar is a politically correct piece of semi-coherent agit-prop lurking behind a lot of over-praised CGI effects. While the fanboys hype it as the next great leap forward in filmmaking, it actually takes a huge step backward by employing one of the oldest and lamest of clichés – the white guy hero representing Western civilization who comes along and saves the natives while embracing their simple yet wise ways.
Read further...
Showing posts with label Marxism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Marxism. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Monday, December 28, 2009
CHA Denies Spilt with Bishops on Abortion
Despite previous reports of disengagement with the USCCB at the New York Times on Healthcare Reform with respect to Abortion, the head of CHA, Sister Keehan, insists that they are fully behind the US Bishop's socialist agenda and its tentative Prolife position.
'Not a shred of disagreement' between CHA, bishops on health reform
By Nancy Frazier O'Brien
Catholic News Service
WASHINGTON (CNS) -- Despite a New York Times report to the contrary, the Catholic Health Association and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops are working together to achieve health reform legislation that does not expand federal funding of abortion, according to the CHA president and CEO.
Sister Carol Keehan, a Daughter of Charity, told Catholic News Service in a telephone interview Dec. 28 that her organization has never wavered in its commitment to health care that protects "from conception to natural death," as outlined in the CHA document, "Our Vision for U.S. Health Care."
She disputed a report in The New York Times Dec. 26 that a recent CHA statement on Senate negotiations over abortion funding in health reform legislation represented a split with the bishops.
"There is not a shred of disagreement between CHA and the bishops," Sister Carol said. "We believe there is a great possibility and probability that in conference committee we can work toward a solution that will prevent federal funding of abortion."
She said the CHA, which represents more than 600 Catholic hospitals in the U.S., "brings a lot of expertise with funding structures in the marketplace" to the debate and hopes to "bring that to bear" during the conference committee's work.
Shortly before the Senate approved its version of health reform legislation early Dec. 24, the chairmen of three USCCB committees said the bill should not be approved "without incorporating essential changes to ensure" that it "truly protects the life, dignity, consciences and health of all."
In a letter sent late Dec. 22, about 36 hours before the Senate's 60-39 vote along party lines, the USCCB leaders pledged continued efforts to incorporate needed changes during the work of the House-Senate conference committee.
"For many months, our bishops' conference has worked with members of Congress, the administration and others to fashion health care reform legislation that truly protects the life, dignity, health and consciences of all," said the letter signed by Cardinal Daniel N. DiNardo of Galveston-Houston and Bishops William F. Murphy of Rockville Centre, N.Y., and John C. Wester of Salt Lake City.
The three chair the USCCB committees on Pro-Life Activities, on Domestic Justice and Human Development and on Migration, respectively.
"We regret to say that in all the areas of our moral concern, the Senate health care reform bill is deficient," the three chairmen added.
The bishops said their biggest problem with the Senate bill was its treatment of abortion funding, which "not only falls short of the House's standard but violates long-standing precedent in all other federal health programs."
In addition to not maintaining the legal status quo on abortion funding that has been supported by President Barack Obama and by the majority of Americans in many polls, the abortion provisions in the manager's amendment to the Senate bill would require purchasers of some health insurance plans "to pay for other people's abortions in a very direct and explicit way," the USCCB letter said.
"There is no provision for individuals to opt out of this abortion payment in federally subsidized plans, so people will be required by law to pay for other people's abortions," it added.
The Senate bill also fails to include provisions to prevent "discrimination against health care providers that decline involvement in abortion" and would not protect the rights of Catholic and other institutions "to provide and purchase health coverage consistent with their moral and religious convictions on other procedures," the chairmen said.
The letter also urged changes in the Senate bill's provisions barring undocumented immigrants from purchasing health insurance from an exchange with their own money and banning legal immigrants from federal health benefit programs for five years.
Sister Carol said Times reporter David D. Kirkpatrick based his Dec. 26 story on a Dec. 17 CHA statement which noted that CHA had not reviewed the language of various amendments on the table at the time but was "encouraged by recent deliberations and the outline" Sen. Robert Casey, D-Pa., was developing.
At that point, "I felt they were making progress and were getting where we needed to be," she said.
"I understand that it doesn't make a good story to say (CHA and the USCCB) are working together," Sister Carol added. "But it would have been an honest story."
In an earlier statement, Cardinal DiNardo said the USCCB would continue to oppose the Senate legislation "unless and until" it is amended to "comply with long-standing Hyde restrictions on federal funding of elective abortions and health plans that include them."
The Hyde amendment prohibits federal funding of abortion except in cases of rape, incest or threat to the woman's life.
On abortion, the USCCB had backed a bipartisan amendment sponsored by Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., and others. Similar to a House-passed measure sponsored by Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., the amendment would have incorporated the Hyde amendment protections into the health reform bill.
When the Senate tabled Nelson's amendment in a 54-45 vote Dec. 8, Cardinal Francis E. George of Chicago, USCCB president, and the three USCCB chairmen called it "a grave mistake and a serious blow to genuine health reform."
Nelson joined with the 57 other Senate Democrats and two independents in voting Dec. 19 to end debate on the health reform legislation, cutting off a Republican filibuster.
Nelson told the Lincoln Journal Star Dec. 23 that he "did not compromise my pro-life principles" by supporting the Senate language on abortion funding. "We just found different language that will work," he added.
Link to original...
'Not a shred of disagreement' between CHA, bishops on health reform
By Nancy Frazier O'Brien
Catholic News Service
WASHINGTON (CNS) -- Despite a New York Times report to the contrary, the Catholic Health Association and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops are working together to achieve health reform legislation that does not expand federal funding of abortion, according to the CHA president and CEO.
Sister Carol Keehan, a Daughter of Charity, told Catholic News Service in a telephone interview Dec. 28 that her organization has never wavered in its commitment to health care that protects "from conception to natural death," as outlined in the CHA document, "Our Vision for U.S. Health Care."
She disputed a report in The New York Times Dec. 26 that a recent CHA statement on Senate negotiations over abortion funding in health reform legislation represented a split with the bishops.
"There is not a shred of disagreement between CHA and the bishops," Sister Carol said. "We believe there is a great possibility and probability that in conference committee we can work toward a solution that will prevent federal funding of abortion."
She said the CHA, which represents more than 600 Catholic hospitals in the U.S., "brings a lot of expertise with funding structures in the marketplace" to the debate and hopes to "bring that to bear" during the conference committee's work.
Shortly before the Senate approved its version of health reform legislation early Dec. 24, the chairmen of three USCCB committees said the bill should not be approved "without incorporating essential changes to ensure" that it "truly protects the life, dignity, consciences and health of all."
In a letter sent late Dec. 22, about 36 hours before the Senate's 60-39 vote along party lines, the USCCB leaders pledged continued efforts to incorporate needed changes during the work of the House-Senate conference committee.
"For many months, our bishops' conference has worked with members of Congress, the administration and others to fashion health care reform legislation that truly protects the life, dignity, health and consciences of all," said the letter signed by Cardinal Daniel N. DiNardo of Galveston-Houston and Bishops William F. Murphy of Rockville Centre, N.Y., and John C. Wester of Salt Lake City.
The three chair the USCCB committees on Pro-Life Activities, on Domestic Justice and Human Development and on Migration, respectively.
"We regret to say that in all the areas of our moral concern, the Senate health care reform bill is deficient," the three chairmen added.
The bishops said their biggest problem with the Senate bill was its treatment of abortion funding, which "not only falls short of the House's standard but violates long-standing precedent in all other federal health programs."
In addition to not maintaining the legal status quo on abortion funding that has been supported by President Barack Obama and by the majority of Americans in many polls, the abortion provisions in the manager's amendment to the Senate bill would require purchasers of some health insurance plans "to pay for other people's abortions in a very direct and explicit way," the USCCB letter said.
"There is no provision for individuals to opt out of this abortion payment in federally subsidized plans, so people will be required by law to pay for other people's abortions," it added.
The Senate bill also fails to include provisions to prevent "discrimination against health care providers that decline involvement in abortion" and would not protect the rights of Catholic and other institutions "to provide and purchase health coverage consistent with their moral and religious convictions on other procedures," the chairmen said.
The letter also urged changes in the Senate bill's provisions barring undocumented immigrants from purchasing health insurance from an exchange with their own money and banning legal immigrants from federal health benefit programs for five years.
Sister Carol said Times reporter David D. Kirkpatrick based his Dec. 26 story on a Dec. 17 CHA statement which noted that CHA had not reviewed the language of various amendments on the table at the time but was "encouraged by recent deliberations and the outline" Sen. Robert Casey, D-Pa., was developing.
At that point, "I felt they were making progress and were getting where we needed to be," she said.
"I understand that it doesn't make a good story to say (CHA and the USCCB) are working together," Sister Carol added. "But it would have been an honest story."
In an earlier statement, Cardinal DiNardo said the USCCB would continue to oppose the Senate legislation "unless and until" it is amended to "comply with long-standing Hyde restrictions on federal funding of elective abortions and health plans that include them."
The Hyde amendment prohibits federal funding of abortion except in cases of rape, incest or threat to the woman's life.
On abortion, the USCCB had backed a bipartisan amendment sponsored by Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., and others. Similar to a House-passed measure sponsored by Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., the amendment would have incorporated the Hyde amendment protections into the health reform bill.
When the Senate tabled Nelson's amendment in a 54-45 vote Dec. 8, Cardinal Francis E. George of Chicago, USCCB president, and the three USCCB chairmen called it "a grave mistake and a serious blow to genuine health reform."
Nelson joined with the 57 other Senate Democrats and two independents in voting Dec. 19 to end debate on the health reform legislation, cutting off a Republican filibuster.
Nelson told the Lincoln Journal Star Dec. 23 that he "did not compromise my pro-life principles" by supporting the Senate language on abortion funding. "We just found different language that will work," he added.
Link to original...
Columbian Governor Arrests Christians
Governor outlaws Christianity, arrests believers in Colombia
28 indigenous Colombian Christians have been imprisoned since October for refusing to denounce their faith, reports MNN.
Logan Maurer with International Christian Concern says the central government gave local governors relative autonomy. "They have devolved power to a governor there who has outlawed Christianity. He has said that if anybody there is a Christian, they're going to go to prison."
With that announcement, the local governor over the Kogui (ko-gee) called the Christians together on October 27th. "He was holding a meeting to discuss this issue," said Maurer, "and he surprised these Christians by saying, 'You're all under arrest.'"
The governor wants them to maintain more of the traditional identity to the tribal region, which includes animism. The group is still being held because they refuse to reconvert.
Christian Solidarity Worldwide says at last report, two of the kidnapped infants were seriously ill. The governor and his allies also humiliated non-Christian leaders who had supported the Christians in the community and protected them from being expelled.
What's especially odd about this case is that the Colombian government has apparently refused to act on behalf of the Christians. That's prompting outcry from human rights watchdog groups. Maurer adds that the Colombian government is "willing to ignore its own Constitution and its international agreements, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the ICCPR, the ICSECR, and the American Convention on Human Rights--all of which explicitly protect the right of individuals to choose their own faith and to convert of their own free will."
Link to original...
28 indigenous Colombian Christians have been imprisoned since October for refusing to denounce their faith, reports MNN.
Logan Maurer with International Christian Concern says the central government gave local governors relative autonomy. "They have devolved power to a governor there who has outlawed Christianity. He has said that if anybody there is a Christian, they're going to go to prison."
With that announcement, the local governor over the Kogui (ko-gee) called the Christians together on October 27th. "He was holding a meeting to discuss this issue," said Maurer, "and he surprised these Christians by saying, 'You're all under arrest.'"
The governor wants them to maintain more of the traditional identity to the tribal region, which includes animism. The group is still being held because they refuse to reconvert.
Christian Solidarity Worldwide says at last report, two of the kidnapped infants were seriously ill. The governor and his allies also humiliated non-Christian leaders who had supported the Christians in the community and protected them from being expelled.
What's especially odd about this case is that the Colombian government has apparently refused to act on behalf of the Christians. That's prompting outcry from human rights watchdog groups. Maurer adds that the Colombian government is "willing to ignore its own Constitution and its international agreements, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the ICCPR, the ICSECR, and the American Convention on Human Rights--all of which explicitly protect the right of individuals to choose their own faith and to convert of their own free will."
Link to original...
Is the Left Anti-Semitic After All?
Well, the left hates Joey Liberman (I), so it must be anti-semitic, because it hates Israel. Does the knife cut both ways? Never before has supporting Israel been so much fun, because you get to trash two faulty ideologies at once.
The Examener
Ruminations, December 27, 2009
Health insurance lives saved vs. lives lost
The Institute of Medicine, the health branch of the National Academy of Sciences, issued an analysis that concluded 22,000 lives were lost in 2006 due to a lack of health insurance. Many proponents of the new health care proposals are projecting their figures across 10 years and estimating that the new Congressional health care bill will save, conservatively, 150,000 lives over 10 years.
Although this analysis is speculative, it is an interesting and worthwhile exercise to examine the potential effect of health insurance on longevity. Rather than focusing on the dollars and cents side of the health care debate, perhaps adding an additional balance sheet focusing on lives would be worthwhile.
Saving 22,000 lives per year is based upon 30 million of people who are currently uninsured obtaining insurance and thus being able to afford to see their doctors once a year. If 30 million more people will go to their doctor once a year and, according to some estimates, a doctor and an assistant (nurse, physician’s assistant, or another doctor, etc) can see and examine 2,000 people per year (one visit per person). That means we’ll need 30,000 new medical professionals to see 30 million people. Where will they come from? They won’t materialize from thin air. With current staffing levels, regardless of insurance, we won’t have enough medical professionals to see these people. So maybe, unless or until we can expand our medical professionals, the 30 million people currently uninsured still won’t be able to see a doctor and 22,000 lives we estimated that would be saved will be lost anyway.
While accepting the estimate of 22,000 lives saved in one year, let’s consider the number of lives that the new health care bill may cost. For instance, won’t cutting nearly $500 billion from Medicare over 10 years have an adverse affect on the life spans of 46 million seniors? That’s an average cut of $10,000 per person over 10 years. It seems that by reducing health care by that amount, for a group whose earning power is limited and whose advancing years makes their health precarious enough without the cuts, will contribute to the lives lost count. Will it contribute to the premature death of more than 150,000 over ten years? Could be.
And, while we are on the subject of saving lives, there is no doubt that American medical innovation over the last decades has saved millions of lives. In fact, it is so advanced and superior, that, according to Deloitte & Touche, last year 400,000 people came from foreign lands to get health care in the United States. They came from all over including places such as Canada and Great Britain, where national health care is provided gratis. Why did they come? Not to save money, that’s for sure. They came because they wanted innovative health care that was unavailable in their home countries. Many, including those with diverse political perspectives as liberal former Clinton Labor Secretary Robert Reich and conservative Fox commentator John Stossel, believe that a new health care system will not provide new innovations and, consequently it may cause a number of premature deaths that innovation could have saved.
So, on balance, will the new health care bill in Congress save lives? Maybe not.
Lieberman and anti-Semitism
The last two members of the Democratic caucus fell into line last week and supported the Democrats health care bill. Joe Lieberman (I, CT) and Ben Nelson (D, NE) voted to end debate on the bill and proceed towards its passage.
The left has been almost apoplectic on the about Joe Lieberman (I, CT), who threatened to join Republicans and filibuster the Senate Health Care bill. But when Lieberman’s objections to the “public option” and to the provision to allow people under 65 to apply for Medicare were met, he withdrew his filibuster threat and supported the bill. Lieberman had held out on principle. And by mollifying Lieberman, the Democrats were able to secure his support. But the left still treats him as a traitor.
Ben Nelson (D, NE), the last hold out, came back to the party-line when he was offered a $100 million subsidy for his Nebraska voters and tax breaks for Nebraska insurance companies. After he came back, the left treated him like a hero.
You can agree or disagree with Nelson and Lieberman but can you hold a mercenary in higher regard than a man who stands on principle?
It doesn’t seem so for many of the left. Rosa DeLauro (D, CT) says, “I'll say it flat out, I think he [Lieberman] ought to be recalled." MoveOn.org has raised one million dollars so that when Lieberman “comes up for re-election, we'll make sure we send him home for good.” Michael Moore demands that Connecticut recall Lieberman and wants to punish Connecticut for electing Lieberman by means of a boycott. MSNBC news commentator Keith Obermann said that Lieberman was “embarrassing humanity.” And the Susan G. Komen breast cancer foundation has been pressured to sever relationship with Lieberman’s wife, Hadassah.
Is there something else at work here – something other than political opposition? When people oppose President Barack Obama, some of Obama’s supporters are quick to state or imply that the reason for the opposition to Obama is racism. Could one conclude that the reason for the strong opposition to Lieberman is anti-Semitism?
First of all, let’s set aside the lunatic fringe that will always be with us. There is no doubt that there is a small group of people who don’t like Lieberman because he is a Jew – just as there exists a small group of people who don’t like Obama because he is black. Small fringe groups, however outrageous their beliefs, are of little concern; when the group gets large or influential, that’s when it bears watching.
In Lieberman’s case, the left has other reasons to dislike him. In 2006, Lieberman returned from a fact-finding trip to Iraq and declared the war not only winnable but worth fighting. This infuriated the left and, at the Connecticut Democratic state Convention, instead of nominating the incumbent Lieberman, anti-war candidate Ned Lamont was nominated for senator. Lieberman then had the effrontery, in the eyes of the left, to run for senator as an independent against a party-line Democrat – and he won.
In 2008, Lieberman spoke at the Republican National Convention and endorsed Republican John McCain.
While many on the left urge rapprochement with Cuba, Lieberman has remained strongly anti-Castro.
And, while a significant portion of the American left leans toward Palestine in the Israeli-Palestinian controversy, Lieberman is strongly pro-Israel.
So the resentment of Lieberman for opposing the party orthodoxy has been building. Was the Health Care kerfuffle the tipping point? Is it a knee-jerk reaction to dismiss Lieberman detractors as anti-Semites? Let’s explore that notion.
There still is a remnant of anti-Semitism in the United States and some of it by seemingly responsible public figures and politicians who should know better. Former Senator Fritz Hollings (D, SC), for example, implied that President Bush initiated the war on terror in order to appease Jews.
While anti-Semitism in the United States is not at the levels it had been in the 1930s, it still exists. In November 2005, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights issued a Campus Anti-Semitism briefing report (http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/081506campusantibrief07.pdf) that said, “Indeed, anti-Semitism and anti-Israelism flourish on college campuses because of the energetic focus of a determined minority and their willingness to dedicate themselves to this cause.” If that was and is the case, we don’t need to wonder that the attitudes of people who have been subjected to academic precepts of anti-Semitism made to sound intellectual will become anti-Semites themselves.
But according to the Commission, it is a small group of determined activists that foment anti-Semitism on campus. And who is it that leads political groups? Small groups of determined activists.
One of the Commission’s major findings is that “The assault on Jewish nationalism is embedded in the ideology of the left” and that "Anti-Semitic bigotry is no less morally deplorable when camouflaged as anti-Israelism or anti-Zionism." As was pointed out above, Lieberman strongly supports Israel.
Former Soviet dissident and Israeli government official Natan Sharansky stated that “One of the major difficulties in grappling with the new anti-Semitism is the ease with which it can be denied. Unlike in the past, post-modern anti-Semitism no longer exclusively involves such phenomena as violence against the Jews, sporting swastikas and burning synagogues. While these phenomena do indeed exist and are even increasing, especially in Europe, today they form only part of the problem.”
So, is opposition to Lieberman anti-Semitism camouflaged as politics or is it legitimate political opposition? It’s probably both. There is no doubt Lieberman has, overall, a liberal voting record. But liberal-versus-conservative voting records are hard to measure; the big issues for the left over the past year have been the war in Iraq, the presidential election and health care. Lieberman has, at times, opposed the left on all three.
Just as Lieberman has taken principled stands to oppose the left, it is fair to say that many on the left are taking principled stands in opposing Lieberman. Some of that opposition may be anti-Semitism camouflaged in principle and some, when it is expressed with venom and rancor, may not be camouflaged but blatant anti-Semitism.
The conclusion? It’s worrisome.
Link to original...
The Examener
Ruminations, December 27, 2009
Health insurance lives saved vs. lives lost
The Institute of Medicine, the health branch of the National Academy of Sciences, issued an analysis that concluded 22,000 lives were lost in 2006 due to a lack of health insurance. Many proponents of the new health care proposals are projecting their figures across 10 years and estimating that the new Congressional health care bill will save, conservatively, 150,000 lives over 10 years.
Although this analysis is speculative, it is an interesting and worthwhile exercise to examine the potential effect of health insurance on longevity. Rather than focusing on the dollars and cents side of the health care debate, perhaps adding an additional balance sheet focusing on lives would be worthwhile.
Saving 22,000 lives per year is based upon 30 million of people who are currently uninsured obtaining insurance and thus being able to afford to see their doctors once a year. If 30 million more people will go to their doctor once a year and, according to some estimates, a doctor and an assistant (nurse, physician’s assistant, or another doctor, etc) can see and examine 2,000 people per year (one visit per person). That means we’ll need 30,000 new medical professionals to see 30 million people. Where will they come from? They won’t materialize from thin air. With current staffing levels, regardless of insurance, we won’t have enough medical professionals to see these people. So maybe, unless or until we can expand our medical professionals, the 30 million people currently uninsured still won’t be able to see a doctor and 22,000 lives we estimated that would be saved will be lost anyway.
While accepting the estimate of 22,000 lives saved in one year, let’s consider the number of lives that the new health care bill may cost. For instance, won’t cutting nearly $500 billion from Medicare over 10 years have an adverse affect on the life spans of 46 million seniors? That’s an average cut of $10,000 per person over 10 years. It seems that by reducing health care by that amount, for a group whose earning power is limited and whose advancing years makes their health precarious enough without the cuts, will contribute to the lives lost count. Will it contribute to the premature death of more than 150,000 over ten years? Could be.
And, while we are on the subject of saving lives, there is no doubt that American medical innovation over the last decades has saved millions of lives. In fact, it is so advanced and superior, that, according to Deloitte & Touche, last year 400,000 people came from foreign lands to get health care in the United States. They came from all over including places such as Canada and Great Britain, where national health care is provided gratis. Why did they come? Not to save money, that’s for sure. They came because they wanted innovative health care that was unavailable in their home countries. Many, including those with diverse political perspectives as liberal former Clinton Labor Secretary Robert Reich and conservative Fox commentator John Stossel, believe that a new health care system will not provide new innovations and, consequently it may cause a number of premature deaths that innovation could have saved.
So, on balance, will the new health care bill in Congress save lives? Maybe not.
Lieberman and anti-Semitism
The last two members of the Democratic caucus fell into line last week and supported the Democrats health care bill. Joe Lieberman (I, CT) and Ben Nelson (D, NE) voted to end debate on the bill and proceed towards its passage.
The left has been almost apoplectic on the about Joe Lieberman (I, CT), who threatened to join Republicans and filibuster the Senate Health Care bill. But when Lieberman’s objections to the “public option” and to the provision to allow people under 65 to apply for Medicare were met, he withdrew his filibuster threat and supported the bill. Lieberman had held out on principle. And by mollifying Lieberman, the Democrats were able to secure his support. But the left still treats him as a traitor.
Ben Nelson (D, NE), the last hold out, came back to the party-line when he was offered a $100 million subsidy for his Nebraska voters and tax breaks for Nebraska insurance companies. After he came back, the left treated him like a hero.
You can agree or disagree with Nelson and Lieberman but can you hold a mercenary in higher regard than a man who stands on principle?
It doesn’t seem so for many of the left. Rosa DeLauro (D, CT) says, “I'll say it flat out, I think he [Lieberman] ought to be recalled." MoveOn.org has raised one million dollars so that when Lieberman “comes up for re-election, we'll make sure we send him home for good.” Michael Moore demands that Connecticut recall Lieberman and wants to punish Connecticut for electing Lieberman by means of a boycott. MSNBC news commentator Keith Obermann said that Lieberman was “embarrassing humanity.” And the Susan G. Komen breast cancer foundation has been pressured to sever relationship with Lieberman’s wife, Hadassah.
Is there something else at work here – something other than political opposition? When people oppose President Barack Obama, some of Obama’s supporters are quick to state or imply that the reason for the opposition to Obama is racism. Could one conclude that the reason for the strong opposition to Lieberman is anti-Semitism?
First of all, let’s set aside the lunatic fringe that will always be with us. There is no doubt that there is a small group of people who don’t like Lieberman because he is a Jew – just as there exists a small group of people who don’t like Obama because he is black. Small fringe groups, however outrageous their beliefs, are of little concern; when the group gets large or influential, that’s when it bears watching.
In Lieberman’s case, the left has other reasons to dislike him. In 2006, Lieberman returned from a fact-finding trip to Iraq and declared the war not only winnable but worth fighting. This infuriated the left and, at the Connecticut Democratic state Convention, instead of nominating the incumbent Lieberman, anti-war candidate Ned Lamont was nominated for senator. Lieberman then had the effrontery, in the eyes of the left, to run for senator as an independent against a party-line Democrat – and he won.
In 2008, Lieberman spoke at the Republican National Convention and endorsed Republican John McCain.
While many on the left urge rapprochement with Cuba, Lieberman has remained strongly anti-Castro.
And, while a significant portion of the American left leans toward Palestine in the Israeli-Palestinian controversy, Lieberman is strongly pro-Israel.
So the resentment of Lieberman for opposing the party orthodoxy has been building. Was the Health Care kerfuffle the tipping point? Is it a knee-jerk reaction to dismiss Lieberman detractors as anti-Semites? Let’s explore that notion.
There still is a remnant of anti-Semitism in the United States and some of it by seemingly responsible public figures and politicians who should know better. Former Senator Fritz Hollings (D, SC), for example, implied that President Bush initiated the war on terror in order to appease Jews.
While anti-Semitism in the United States is not at the levels it had been in the 1930s, it still exists. In November 2005, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights issued a Campus Anti-Semitism briefing report (http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/081506campusantibrief07.pdf) that said, “Indeed, anti-Semitism and anti-Israelism flourish on college campuses because of the energetic focus of a determined minority and their willingness to dedicate themselves to this cause.” If that was and is the case, we don’t need to wonder that the attitudes of people who have been subjected to academic precepts of anti-Semitism made to sound intellectual will become anti-Semites themselves.
But according to the Commission, it is a small group of determined activists that foment anti-Semitism on campus. And who is it that leads political groups? Small groups of determined activists.
One of the Commission’s major findings is that “The assault on Jewish nationalism is embedded in the ideology of the left” and that "Anti-Semitic bigotry is no less morally deplorable when camouflaged as anti-Israelism or anti-Zionism." As was pointed out above, Lieberman strongly supports Israel.
Former Soviet dissident and Israeli government official Natan Sharansky stated that “One of the major difficulties in grappling with the new anti-Semitism is the ease with which it can be denied. Unlike in the past, post-modern anti-Semitism no longer exclusively involves such phenomena as violence against the Jews, sporting swastikas and burning synagogues. While these phenomena do indeed exist and are even increasing, especially in Europe, today they form only part of the problem.”
So, is opposition to Lieberman anti-Semitism camouflaged as politics or is it legitimate political opposition? It’s probably both. There is no doubt Lieberman has, overall, a liberal voting record. But liberal-versus-conservative voting records are hard to measure; the big issues for the left over the past year have been the war in Iraq, the presidential election and health care. Lieberman has, at times, opposed the left on all three.
Just as Lieberman has taken principled stands to oppose the left, it is fair to say that many on the left are taking principled stands in opposing Lieberman. Some of that opposition may be anti-Semitism camouflaged in principle and some, when it is expressed with venom and rancor, may not be camouflaged but blatant anti-Semitism.
The conclusion? It’s worrisome.
Link to original...
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Catholic Hospitals and Church Split over Abortion Coverage
As Catholic Schools don't teach much in the way of Catholicism, so Catholic Hospitals are not very consistent in following Catholic moral teaching with regard to abortion. It's unfortunate enough that liberals, getting it wrong as they often do, fail to understand the issue outside of their quest to justify sexual license and personal "liberty" that the consequences of the normalization of this situation is higher than they understand.
As those who have been following the congressional health care bill know, the Catholic Church has played a significant role, expressing its disapproval mostly over federal funding for coverage of abortion procedures. The Church backed the House's Stupak Amendment, which "bars a new government-run insurance plan from covering abortions, except in cases or rape, incest or the life of the mother being in danger, and prohibits any health plan that receives federal subsidies in a new insurance marketplace from offering abortion coverage," and has expressed dismay at the new compromises over abortion in the Senate (ones which, ironically, pro-choice advocates are not happy with either).
From the New York Times, the new provisions allow "any state to bar the use of federal subsidies for insurance plans that cover abortion and requires insurers in other states to divide subsidy money into separate accounts so that only dollars from private premiums would be used to pay for abortions." This makes it difficult, bureaucratic, and certainly not desirable for insurance companies to cover abortions - but it still does not ban abortion coverage completely.
Link to original...
As those who have been following the congressional health care bill know, the Catholic Church has played a significant role, expressing its disapproval mostly over federal funding for coverage of abortion procedures. The Church backed the House's Stupak Amendment, which "bars a new government-run insurance plan from covering abortions, except in cases or rape, incest or the life of the mother being in danger, and prohibits any health plan that receives federal subsidies in a new insurance marketplace from offering abortion coverage," and has expressed dismay at the new compromises over abortion in the Senate (ones which, ironically, pro-choice advocates are not happy with either).
From the New York Times, the new provisions allow "any state to bar the use of federal subsidies for insurance plans that cover abortion and requires insurers in other states to divide subsidy money into separate accounts so that only dollars from private premiums would be used to pay for abortions." This makes it difficult, bureaucratic, and certainly not desirable for insurance companies to cover abortions - but it still does not ban abortion coverage completely.
Link to original...
Saturday, December 26, 2009
Catholics Should Stop Funding Kairos
Editorials
Catholics should stop funding KAIROS
By Fr. Alphonse de Valk
Issue: January 2010
Throughout much of 2009 Canada’s Catholic bishops have been struggling how to handle the controversy with the Canadian Catholic Organization of Development and Peace (CCODP). Readers will recall that the controversy began in March of 2009 when the pro-life news agency LifeSiteNews.com, which issues daily bulletins on the internet of what is happening in The Americas and the rest of the world with respect to the “life” issues (abortion, contraception, bio-ethics, sexual orientation, etc.) came across evidence that a number of foreign partners of CCODP were involved in sometimes anti-life activities.
On enquiry with D&P HQ in Montreal it was discovered that D&P “did not have a policy for or against abortion.” (“The Development and Peace conundrum,” C.I., Sept. 2009, p. 3). In an age where secularism is ruthlessly anti-life and neutrality is an unknown commodity, that meant that D&P was quite comfortable supporting anti-life organizations under the guise of “we don’t know anything about it.”
Link to original...
Catholics should stop funding KAIROS
By Fr. Alphonse de Valk
Issue: January 2010
Throughout much of 2009 Canada’s Catholic bishops have been struggling how to handle the controversy with the Canadian Catholic Organization of Development and Peace (CCODP). Readers will recall that the controversy began in March of 2009 when the pro-life news agency LifeSiteNews.com, which issues daily bulletins on the internet of what is happening in The Americas and the rest of the world with respect to the “life” issues (abortion, contraception, bio-ethics, sexual orientation, etc.) came across evidence that a number of foreign partners of CCODP were involved in sometimes anti-life activities.
On enquiry with D&P HQ in Montreal it was discovered that D&P “did not have a policy for or against abortion.” (“The Development and Peace conundrum,” C.I., Sept. 2009, p. 3). In an age where secularism is ruthlessly anti-life and neutrality is an unknown commodity, that meant that D&P was quite comfortable supporting anti-life organizations under the guise of “we don’t know anything about it.”
Link to original...
Friday, December 25, 2009
Why Aren't American Bishops Resigning?
Ok, we write about this all of the time, we write about the moral and intellectual incapacity of most Bishops to reign their Diocese. They live in an environment of not so benign neglect, and the welcome deaths of the Theologians of the Vatican II generation, notably Fr. Schilebeecx a few days ago, and Fr. Godfry Dieckman OSB, has us thinking about how people compartmentalize things to the point where the emotional attachments exist without any rational justification.
A lot of people would get arrested for practicing surgery without the need or requisite training and certification, but in Theology, you can botch all kinds of souls and no one says anything. Even the state turns a blind eye when professional Clerics, under the seal of the confessional, or in the capacity of mental health care workers, take young people into their conference to guide and shape them in a way completely inconsistent with Catholic teaching. The government even turns a blind eye when these unprincipled charlatans seek to take liberties with their charges, like a priest out of Boccaccio's Daecameron, for illicit and forbidden pleasure.
The Scriptures are astoundingly clear, even where civil justice and modern post-Vatican II theologians with their notions of easy virtue and a debased theological perspective and deliberate liturgical chaos fail. Such men should have a milestone tied around their necks and they should be cast into the sea, but quite often, such men will challenge a seeker of justice and the layman so ill-advised to challenge the prelate or priest on his quest for illicit pleasure, had better have a lot of documentation before the Vatican will be forced to act under the pressure of public opinion to remove a man like Archbishop Weakland, who even today, shakes his self-rightous fist at his accusers and justifies his gay-friendly approach. Perhaps such self-righteous homosexuals, publishing words by which we can hang them legally later, is a great ally? These men are brash, and like individual roaches in a plague of roaches, fearless.
If Scriptures are clear, the history of the Church is quite clear. Homosexuals, the kind who nowadays abuse children, would be sent to the scaffold or the stake after a fair trial by the Inquisition. We favor the restoration of this. The Vatican should, in collaboration with existing governments, send independent fact-finders to investigate abuses and try the guilty in ecclesiastical courts where excommunication will be invoked; then the state can try and convict these monsters and ship them to maximum security prisons where they can enjoy the tender mercies of convict justice.
Anyhow, like Fr. Z, we digress, and we've already mentioned the possibility of American Bishops resigning, of course, they have resigned for some right reasons (+Weakland and +Law), but no one, even most of the Catholic press, is addressing the Bishops' failings with regard to teaching and upholding the Catholic Faith. Many Bishops seem to think that supporting Marxists causes such as CCHD and Catholic Charities will save them and sometimes it isn't enough, but in Cardinal Mahony's case, he seems to lead a charmed life. Will no one rid us of this troublesome priest? No one?
Four Irish bishops have now resigned within weeks of a scathing report that they knowingly sheltered sexual predator priests from the laws of church and state.
The 720-report into abuse cover-ups in Dublin from 1940 to 2004 became public in late November. Archbishop of Dublin Diarmuid Martin (shown above), who was brought in after the period dealt with in the report, made it clear that the old ways of protecting priests, not children and teens, were inexcusable.
Two bishops resigned earlier this month. Two more resigned during Christmas Mass, offering apologies to victims and all Dublin's one million Catholics.
Here in the USA, however, only one bishop resigned in acknowledgment of mismanagement.
U.S. Cardinal Bernard Law, who resigned in disgrace as archbishop of Boston over his role in the clergy sex abuse crisis, prays during a Mass at the St. Mary Major Basilica in Rome, Sunday, April 10, 2005.
CAPTIONBy Anja Niedringhaus, APCardinal Bernard Law resigned as Archbishop of Boston, where the scandal erupted here in 2002, in the face of demands from his flock and his priests. Two bishops were ousted because they themselves were credibly accused of abuse -- Rembert Weakland of Milwaukee and Anthony O'Connell of Palm Beach, Fla.
But while the abuse crisis on US shores has largely subsided from the headlines, groups such as BishopAccountability.org continue to call for scores of bishops to do more than apologize for mistakes.
They call for individual accounting for all the records of how abusive priests were dealt with and for bishops to face the canonical and legal consequences of their mismanagement, above and beyond apologies.
Link to original...
A lot of people would get arrested for practicing surgery without the need or requisite training and certification, but in Theology, you can botch all kinds of souls and no one says anything. Even the state turns a blind eye when professional Clerics, under the seal of the confessional, or in the capacity of mental health care workers, take young people into their conference to guide and shape them in a way completely inconsistent with Catholic teaching. The government even turns a blind eye when these unprincipled charlatans seek to take liberties with their charges, like a priest out of Boccaccio's Daecameron, for illicit and forbidden pleasure.
The Scriptures are astoundingly clear, even where civil justice and modern post-Vatican II theologians with their notions of easy virtue and a debased theological perspective and deliberate liturgical chaos fail. Such men should have a milestone tied around their necks and they should be cast into the sea, but quite often, such men will challenge a seeker of justice and the layman so ill-advised to challenge the prelate or priest on his quest for illicit pleasure, had better have a lot of documentation before the Vatican will be forced to act under the pressure of public opinion to remove a man like Archbishop Weakland, who even today, shakes his self-rightous fist at his accusers and justifies his gay-friendly approach. Perhaps such self-righteous homosexuals, publishing words by which we can hang them legally later, is a great ally? These men are brash, and like individual roaches in a plague of roaches, fearless.
If Scriptures are clear, the history of the Church is quite clear. Homosexuals, the kind who nowadays abuse children, would be sent to the scaffold or the stake after a fair trial by the Inquisition. We favor the restoration of this. The Vatican should, in collaboration with existing governments, send independent fact-finders to investigate abuses and try the guilty in ecclesiastical courts where excommunication will be invoked; then the state can try and convict these monsters and ship them to maximum security prisons where they can enjoy the tender mercies of convict justice.
Anyhow, like Fr. Z, we digress, and we've already mentioned the possibility of American Bishops resigning, of course, they have resigned for some right reasons (+Weakland and +Law), but no one, even most of the Catholic press, is addressing the Bishops' failings with regard to teaching and upholding the Catholic Faith. Many Bishops seem to think that supporting Marxists causes such as CCHD and Catholic Charities will save them and sometimes it isn't enough, but in Cardinal Mahony's case, he seems to lead a charmed life. Will no one rid us of this troublesome priest? No one?
Four Irish bishops have now resigned within weeks of a scathing report that they knowingly sheltered sexual predator priests from the laws of church and state.
The 720-report into abuse cover-ups in Dublin from 1940 to 2004 became public in late November. Archbishop of Dublin Diarmuid Martin (shown above), who was brought in after the period dealt with in the report, made it clear that the old ways of protecting priests, not children and teens, were inexcusable.
Two bishops resigned earlier this month. Two more resigned during Christmas Mass, offering apologies to victims and all Dublin's one million Catholics.
Here in the USA, however, only one bishop resigned in acknowledgment of mismanagement.
U.S. Cardinal Bernard Law, who resigned in disgrace as archbishop of Boston over his role in the clergy sex abuse crisis, prays during a Mass at the St. Mary Major Basilica in Rome, Sunday, April 10, 2005.
CAPTIONBy Anja Niedringhaus, APCardinal Bernard Law resigned as Archbishop of Boston, where the scandal erupted here in 2002, in the face of demands from his flock and his priests. Two bishops were ousted because they themselves were credibly accused of abuse -- Rembert Weakland of Milwaukee and Anthony O'Connell of Palm Beach, Fla.
But while the abuse crisis on US shores has largely subsided from the headlines, groups such as BishopAccountability.org continue to call for scores of bishops to do more than apologize for mistakes.
They call for individual accounting for all the records of how abusive priests were dealt with and for bishops to face the canonical and legal consequences of their mismanagement, above and beyond apologies.
Link to original...
Catholic Church in Columbia Wants to Negotiate With FARC
BOGOTA (Reuters) - A Roman Catholic Church official on Friday proposed a meeting in Europe with Colombia's main guerrilla leader to discuss handover of hostages and possible negotiations to end Latin America's oldest insurgency.
World
Previous attempts to bring the FARC, or Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, to the table have failed over conditions for the release of the captives it holds in jungle camps and demands that the rebels end hostilities before talks begin.
Colombian Cardinal Dario Castrillon said the plan to seek talks with the FARC was approved by President Alvaro Uribe, whose U.S.-backed army offensive has battered the guerrilla group to its weakest level in decades.
The proposal for dialogue with FARC commander Alfonso Cano came after Uribe blamed rebels for kidnapping and killing Luis Cuellar, the governor of Caqueta state. He was abducted from his home on Monday and later found with his throat cut, as soldiers pursued the kidnappers.
The kidnapping and murder raised questions about the success of Uribe's campaign against the rebels. Colombia's government has received billions in U.S. aid in its security campaign.
"If there is a dialogue it could be in Europe. The possibility is there. The president agrees with that, as long as it is in the best interests of the country," Castrillon said in an interview with local RCN radio.
He did not give details on where talks could occur.
The FARC has not issued a statement on the kidnapping of Cuellar, the highest-profile attack on a politician during Uribe's presidency. The Colombia leader, however, has ordered his military commanders to try to rescue 24 police and soldiers held by the rebels, some in captivity for more than a decade.
Cano took over the leadership of the rebel group last year after several of its top commanders were killed and its ranks were weakened by a steady flow of desertions due to increasing military pressure.
Uribe, whose father was killed in a botched rebel kidnapping two decades ago, is popular for his security drive which has helped cut back on the kidnapping, bombings and attacks that once made violence endemic in Colombia.
"The government is ready to told talks with these illegal armed groups once they show a real willingness to seek peace," said Cesar Mauricio Velasquez, a presidential spokesman.
Uribe says any dialogue with the FARC must begin with a rebel ceasefire. The FARC has said it wants to handover the 24 hostages for hundreds of jailed fighters.
The rebel group previously has unilaterally released hostages in what it has described as goodwill gestures. Uribe says, while welcomed, those releases are part of FARC attempts to score political points. Rebels had said they planned to free two more hostages soon.
(Writing by Patrick Markey in Bogota; Editing by Paul Simao)
Link to the original...
World
Previous attempts to bring the FARC, or Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, to the table have failed over conditions for the release of the captives it holds in jungle camps and demands that the rebels end hostilities before talks begin.
Colombian Cardinal Dario Castrillon said the plan to seek talks with the FARC was approved by President Alvaro Uribe, whose U.S.-backed army offensive has battered the guerrilla group to its weakest level in decades.
The proposal for dialogue with FARC commander Alfonso Cano came after Uribe blamed rebels for kidnapping and killing Luis Cuellar, the governor of Caqueta state. He was abducted from his home on Monday and later found with his throat cut, as soldiers pursued the kidnappers.
The kidnapping and murder raised questions about the success of Uribe's campaign against the rebels. Colombia's government has received billions in U.S. aid in its security campaign.
"If there is a dialogue it could be in Europe. The possibility is there. The president agrees with that, as long as it is in the best interests of the country," Castrillon said in an interview with local RCN radio.
He did not give details on where talks could occur.
The FARC has not issued a statement on the kidnapping of Cuellar, the highest-profile attack on a politician during Uribe's presidency. The Colombia leader, however, has ordered his military commanders to try to rescue 24 police and soldiers held by the rebels, some in captivity for more than a decade.
Cano took over the leadership of the rebel group last year after several of its top commanders were killed and its ranks were weakened by a steady flow of desertions due to increasing military pressure.
Uribe, whose father was killed in a botched rebel kidnapping two decades ago, is popular for his security drive which has helped cut back on the kidnapping, bombings and attacks that once made violence endemic in Colombia.
"The government is ready to told talks with these illegal armed groups once they show a real willingness to seek peace," said Cesar Mauricio Velasquez, a presidential spokesman.
Uribe says any dialogue with the FARC must begin with a rebel ceasefire. The FARC has said it wants to handover the 24 hostages for hundreds of jailed fighters.
The rebel group previously has unilaterally released hostages in what it has described as goodwill gestures. Uribe says, while welcomed, those releases are part of FARC attempts to score political points. Rebels had said they planned to free two more hostages soon.
(Writing by Patrick Markey in Bogota; Editing by Paul Simao)
Link to the original...
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
New Details on Claims against Modernist Monastery
It's going to be difficult to take a case on now that the perpetrator is dead, but the presence of systemic and institutional abuse has been part of Novice formation since Abbot Eidenschenk would inspect his Novices in the nude as part of their counseling.
A deceased former Hastings area resident and priest, who was a counselor at St. John's University in Collegeville, Minn., for many years, is named in two civil lawsuits filed in Stearns County alleging sexual misconduct as far back as the early 1970s.
By: Jane Lightbourn, The Hastings Star-Gazette
A deceased former Hastings area resident and priest, who was a counselor at St. John's University in Collegeville, Minn., for many years, is named in two civil lawsuits filed in Stearns County alleging sexual misconduct as far back as the early 1970s.
The first lawsuit was filed by Jeremiah “Jerry” McCarthy, now living in New York. He accuses the college and the church officials of knowing in the mid-1960s that the Rev. Bruce Wollmering, who died earlier this year at the age of 68, had been “sexually inappropriate” with a child.
McCarthy was a 16-year-old preparatory student at St. John's in 1971 when he met with Wollmering for academic and psychological testing and spiritual counseling. He said the sexual contact with Wollmering occurred in Wollmering's office.
According to the first lawsuit, McCarthy accuses Wollmering of having a long history of sexual misconduct with students and the college of being aware of it.
The second lawsuit, filed Dec. 16, names Wollmering, two other individuals and the Order of St. Benedict, charging them with sexual misconduct (or being aware of the misconduct) against a then-student at the university.
The suit alleges Wollmering, the Rev. Finnian McDonald and Brother John Kelly sexually violated a 19-year-old student (identified only as John Doe in the lawsuit) and that Catholic officials knew or should have known of the incidents.
Specifically, the lawsuit charges that from 1984 to 1986, through his “role of psychologist, counselor and/or spiritual advisor,” Wollmering “deceived” Doe into “engaging in illegal sexual contact with him under the guise of providing religious instruction and emotional counseling.”
The lawsuit also alleges McDonald, while heading the academic advisory program, sexually exploited Doe, and that Kelly, while a faculty member engaged in illegal sexual contact with Doe.
According to the lawsuit, Doe was “raised in a devout Roman Catholic family and therefore developed great admiration, trust, reverence and respect for the Roman Catholic Church and its agents.”
The lawsuit indicated Wollmering provided spiritual and emotional guidance to Doe. But that, beginning in 1984, “Wollmering deceived Plaintiff John Doe into engaging in sexual contact.” The sexual contact continued for approximately two years, according to the lawsuit.
“That a student gets sexually abused by three clerics in three years at St. John's shows that the recklessness, deceit, corruption of church officials was very widespread,” said attorney Patrick Noaker of the St. Paul law firm of Jeffrey Anderson and Associates, who is representing the alleged victim. “We're grateful for this young man and each of the dozens of others who have helped expose dangerous Benedictine clerics.”
The suits seeks a jury trial and unspecified damages. Doe, now in his 40s, lives on the west coast.
After the first civil lawsuit was filed in Stearns County (Dec. 9), St. John's Abbey released a statement, indicating its position. “St. John's takes the issue of sexual misconduct very seriously, and over many years, has worked to ensure that policies and procedures on human rights are followed and enforced,” the statement said. [The inevitable pusilanimous disclaimer]
Link to original...
A deceased former Hastings area resident and priest, who was a counselor at St. John's University in Collegeville, Minn., for many years, is named in two civil lawsuits filed in Stearns County alleging sexual misconduct as far back as the early 1970s.
By: Jane Lightbourn, The Hastings Star-Gazette
A deceased former Hastings area resident and priest, who was a counselor at St. John's University in Collegeville, Minn., for many years, is named in two civil lawsuits filed in Stearns County alleging sexual misconduct as far back as the early 1970s.
The first lawsuit was filed by Jeremiah “Jerry” McCarthy, now living in New York. He accuses the college and the church officials of knowing in the mid-1960s that the Rev. Bruce Wollmering, who died earlier this year at the age of 68, had been “sexually inappropriate” with a child.
McCarthy was a 16-year-old preparatory student at St. John's in 1971 when he met with Wollmering for academic and psychological testing and spiritual counseling. He said the sexual contact with Wollmering occurred in Wollmering's office.
According to the first lawsuit, McCarthy accuses Wollmering of having a long history of sexual misconduct with students and the college of being aware of it.
The second lawsuit, filed Dec. 16, names Wollmering, two other individuals and the Order of St. Benedict, charging them with sexual misconduct (or being aware of the misconduct) against a then-student at the university.
The suit alleges Wollmering, the Rev. Finnian McDonald and Brother John Kelly sexually violated a 19-year-old student (identified only as John Doe in the lawsuit) and that Catholic officials knew or should have known of the incidents.
Specifically, the lawsuit charges that from 1984 to 1986, through his “role of psychologist, counselor and/or spiritual advisor,” Wollmering “deceived” Doe into “engaging in illegal sexual contact with him under the guise of providing religious instruction and emotional counseling.”
The lawsuit also alleges McDonald, while heading the academic advisory program, sexually exploited Doe, and that Kelly, while a faculty member engaged in illegal sexual contact with Doe.
According to the lawsuit, Doe was “raised in a devout Roman Catholic family and therefore developed great admiration, trust, reverence and respect for the Roman Catholic Church and its agents.”
The lawsuit indicated Wollmering provided spiritual and emotional guidance to Doe. But that, beginning in 1984, “Wollmering deceived Plaintiff John Doe into engaging in sexual contact.” The sexual contact continued for approximately two years, according to the lawsuit.
“That a student gets sexually abused by three clerics in three years at St. John's shows that the recklessness, deceit, corruption of church officials was very widespread,” said attorney Patrick Noaker of the St. Paul law firm of Jeffrey Anderson and Associates, who is representing the alleged victim. “We're grateful for this young man and each of the dozens of others who have helped expose dangerous Benedictine clerics.”
The suits seeks a jury trial and unspecified damages. Doe, now in his 40s, lives on the west coast.
After the first civil lawsuit was filed in Stearns County (Dec. 9), St. John's Abbey released a statement, indicating its position. “St. John's takes the issue of sexual misconduct very seriously, and over many years, has worked to ensure that policies and procedures on human rights are followed and enforced,” the statement said. [The inevitable pusilanimous disclaimer]
Link to original...
CCHD Grantee Refers Homeless to Planned Parenthood: Oregon
Remember Oregon, with all the sex-abuse claims from the Jesuits?
Pro-Life Action of Oregon
(Portland, Ore., Dec 23, 2009, Pro-Life Action of Oregon)
STREET ROOTS, a newspaper for the homeless, received $5,000 of Archdiocesan money this year that originates from the collection basket at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. See Dec. 17, 2009 Sentinel article: ‘Archdiocese of Portland Presents Grants to Anti-Poverty Groups.’
Follow The Left-Wing Ideology
The Street Roots newspaper publishes a homeless guide, ‘THE ROSE CITY RESOURCE.’
The Rose City Resource guidebook refers the homeless – under “Health Resources” – to PLANNED PARENTHOOD. Pro-Life Action of Oregon spoke with Eddie Barbosa today and he confirmed that their current guidebook lists Planned Parenthood. (He gave us the phone numbers and the Tri-Met bus numbers to take, thinking we called for directions.)
Furthermore, the guidebook online displays a MAP OF RESOURCES. We located Planned Parenthood locations on the map.
Also troubling is the PARTISAN POLITICS involved. Street Roots newspaper online directs visitors to DEMOCRACY IN ACTION: “Wiring The Progressive Movement.”
Help us continue to serve the community by donating to the Rose City Resource via a secure link through our friends at Democracy in Action.
Are you upset as we are? We’re pretty upset. In fact, we’re angry at the sheer ignorance of those at the Archdiocese in charge of our money.
A soup kitchen would be better!! Donate to the poor DIRECTLY!
Planned Parenthood is an enemy of the Catholic Church. Just look at this fund raising ad which mocks Our Lord’s birth: CHOICE ON EARTH.
Who else mocks Jesus Christ? SATAN. He is the prince of lies.
Link to original...
Pro-Life Action of Oregon
(Portland, Ore., Dec 23, 2009, Pro-Life Action of Oregon)
STREET ROOTS, a newspaper for the homeless, received $5,000 of Archdiocesan money this year that originates from the collection basket at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. See Dec. 17, 2009 Sentinel article: ‘Archdiocese of Portland Presents Grants to Anti-Poverty Groups.’
“When the bishops formed the CCHD, they wanted to take a step beyond charity,” Archbishop John Vlazny says, explaining the program as a complement to the work of Catholic Charities and other groups.
The idea of the bishops was to help the poor help themselves via economic development. The campaign is still choosy about whom it funds, Archbishop Vlazny says, making sure all church criteria are met.
The national campaign backs projects, but so do local dioceses. The three local grants given last week were selected with the help of a committee guided by Matt Cato, director of the archdiocese’s Office of Justice and Peace and Respect for Life. [Emphasis added.]
Follow The Left-Wing Ideology
The Street Roots newspaper publishes a homeless guide, ‘THE ROSE CITY RESOURCE.’
The Rose City Resource guidebook refers the homeless – under “Health Resources” – to PLANNED PARENTHOOD. Pro-Life Action of Oregon spoke with Eddie Barbosa today and he confirmed that their current guidebook lists Planned Parenthood. (He gave us the phone numbers and the Tri-Met bus numbers to take, thinking we called for directions.)
Furthermore, the guidebook online displays a MAP OF RESOURCES. We located Planned Parenthood locations on the map.
Also troubling is the PARTISAN POLITICS involved. Street Roots newspaper online directs visitors to DEMOCRACY IN ACTION: “Wiring The Progressive Movement.”
Help us continue to serve the community by donating to the Rose City Resource via a secure link through our friends at Democracy in Action.
Are you upset as we are? We’re pretty upset. In fact, we’re angry at the sheer ignorance of those at the Archdiocese in charge of our money.
A soup kitchen would be better!! Donate to the poor DIRECTLY!
Planned Parenthood is an enemy of the Catholic Church. Just look at this fund raising ad which mocks Our Lord’s birth: CHOICE ON EARTH.
Who else mocks Jesus Christ? SATAN. He is the prince of lies.
Link to original...
Quisling USCCB Mounts Another Last Ditch Defense
The Bishops aren't too happy that a lot of Marxist legistlation isn't going to be passed into law, but they are, to be fair, keen on insuring that none of this mostly favoured legislation includes funding for abortion. Considering their resistance to the Congressional Bill, it's hard to believe that their resistance against abortion funding wasn't half-hearted like the French General Staff's too deliberate ineptitude in facing the Germans in 1940. Sure, individual units of Frenchmen fought bravely against the invading Germans, but Command Headquarters was largely blind and stuck in a hermetic enclosure from the rest of its armies owing to a complete lack of effectivc communication with its subordinate units; France in 1940, like American Catholicism, is doomed to political irrelavence and defeat.
But we're Catholics, we're used to being murdered by our enemies and betrayed by our shepherds. We should thank God for these tribulations and these shepherds. They and the surrounding irreligion and illusory freedoms give us much opportunity to proove our love of God.
Read the USCCB letter, it'll be dead letter before long, possibly a historical document choronicling the decline and fall of American Catholicism. What an ugly logo.
Here's a blog writing about this. He doesn't get it.
But we're Catholics, we're used to being murdered by our enemies and betrayed by our shepherds. We should thank God for these tribulations and these shepherds. They and the surrounding irreligion and illusory freedoms give us much opportunity to proove our love of God.
Read the USCCB letter, it'll be dead letter before long, possibly a historical document choronicling the decline and fall of American Catholicism. What an ugly logo.
Here's a blog writing about this. He doesn't get it.
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Farc Rebels Kill Columbian Governor
Farc rebels in Colombia have killed a provincial governor hours after kidnapping him in a bold commando raid, marking a return of political kidnaps.
Clad in his pyjamas, Luis Francisco Cuellar was taken from his home in Florencia, capital of Caquetá province, on Monday night after at least eight suspected members of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (Farc) blasted the door down with explosives, according to local officials.
His body was found hours later in a rural area. President Alvaro Uribe said last night that Cuellar's throat had been slit.
The acting Caquetá governor, Patricia Vega, told local radio that the government had confirmed Cuellar's body was found near a vehicle abandoned by the commando squad. "Unfortunately we have to accept this painful reality," Vega said. The Farc has yet to issue a statement.
Officials said information from peasants led troops to the body after Uribe had offered a $500,000 (£313,000) reward for information. Uribe's father was killed in a botched kidnapping in 1982.
Troops combed jungles and mountains of the region throughout Tuesday, searching for Cuellar and his abductors
Link to original...
Clad in his pyjamas, Luis Francisco Cuellar was taken from his home in Florencia, capital of Caquetá province, on Monday night after at least eight suspected members of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (Farc) blasted the door down with explosives, according to local officials.
His body was found hours later in a rural area. President Alvaro Uribe said last night that Cuellar's throat had been slit.
The acting Caquetá governor, Patricia Vega, told local radio that the government had confirmed Cuellar's body was found near a vehicle abandoned by the commando squad. "Unfortunately we have to accept this painful reality," Vega said. The Farc has yet to issue a statement.
Officials said information from peasants led troops to the body after Uribe had offered a $500,000 (£313,000) reward for information. Uribe's father was killed in a botched kidnapping in 1982.
Troops combed jungles and mountains of the region throughout Tuesday, searching for Cuellar and his abductors
Link to original...
News site uncovers political party affiliations of Chicago bishops, chancery staff
December 22, 2009
An investigation by an independent Chicago Catholic news site has found Democrats and Republicans among the Archdiocese of Chicago’s auxiliary bishops and key members of the chancery staff.
Those who requested Democratic ballots in 2008 included retired Auxiliary Bishop John Gorman, retired Auxiliary Bishop Timothy Lyne, archdiocesan chancellor Jimmy Lago, and Father Raymond Baumhart, SJ. Those who requested Republican ballots included Auxiliary Bishop Thomas Paprocki, Father Daniel Flens (Cardinal George’s secretary), and Father Thomas Baima, vice president and provost of Mundelein Seminary. In addition, Auxiliary Bishop Joseph Perry said that he voted for presidential candidate John McCain in the general election.
Link to original...
An investigation by an independent Chicago Catholic news site has found Democrats and Republicans among the Archdiocese of Chicago’s auxiliary bishops and key members of the chancery staff.
Those who requested Democratic ballots in 2008 included retired Auxiliary Bishop John Gorman, retired Auxiliary Bishop Timothy Lyne, archdiocesan chancellor Jimmy Lago, and Father Raymond Baumhart, SJ. Those who requested Republican ballots included Auxiliary Bishop Thomas Paprocki, Father Daniel Flens (Cardinal George’s secretary), and Father Thomas Baima, vice president and provost of Mundelein Seminary. In addition, Auxiliary Bishop Joseph Perry said that he voted for presidential candidate John McCain in the general election.
Link to original...
Monday, December 21, 2009
Anarchist Priest Encourages Thievery in the UK
More theological error and anarchy in the CoE.
A clergyman has been criticised as 'highly irresponsible' after advising his congregation to shoplift following his Nativity sermon.
Father Tim Jones, 41, broke off from his traditional annual sermon yesterday to tell his flock that stealing from large chains is sometimes the best option for vulnerable people.
It is far better for people desperate during the recession to shoplift than turn to 'prostitution, mugging or burglary', he said.
The married father-of-two insisted his unusual advice did not break the Bible commandment 'Thou shalt not steal' - because God's love for the poor outweighs his love for the rich. [Preferential option for the poor in Liberation Theology]
But the minister's controversial sermon at St Lawrence Church in York has been slammed by police, the British Retail Consortium and a local MP, who all say that no matter what the circumstances, shoplifting is an offence.
Delivering his festive lesson, Father Jones told the congregation: 'My advice, as a Christian priest, is to shoplift. I do not offer such advice because I think that stealing is a good thing, or because I think it is harmless, for it is neither.
'I would ask that they do not steal from small family businesses, but from large national businesses, knowing that the costs are ultimately passed on to the rest of us in the form of higher prices.
'I would ask them not to take any more than they need, for any longer than they need.
'I offer the advice with a heavy heart and wish society would recognise that bureaucratic ineptitude and systematic delay has created an invitation and incentive to crime for people struggling to cope.'
He added that he felt society had failed the needy, and said it was far better they shoplift than turn to more degrading or violent options such as prostitution, mugging or burglary.
Read more:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1237470/Priest-advises-congregation-shoplift.html
A clergyman has been criticised as 'highly irresponsible' after advising his congregation to shoplift following his Nativity sermon.
Father Tim Jones, 41, broke off from his traditional annual sermon yesterday to tell his flock that stealing from large chains is sometimes the best option for vulnerable people.
It is far better for people desperate during the recession to shoplift than turn to 'prostitution, mugging or burglary', he said.
The married father-of-two insisted his unusual advice did not break the Bible commandment 'Thou shalt not steal' - because God's love for the poor outweighs his love for the rich. [Preferential option for the poor in Liberation Theology]
But the minister's controversial sermon at St Lawrence Church in York has been slammed by police, the British Retail Consortium and a local MP, who all say that no matter what the circumstances, shoplifting is an offence.
Delivering his festive lesson, Father Jones told the congregation: 'My advice, as a Christian priest, is to shoplift. I do not offer such advice because I think that stealing is a good thing, or because I think it is harmless, for it is neither.
'I would ask that they do not steal from small family businesses, but from large national businesses, knowing that the costs are ultimately passed on to the rest of us in the form of higher prices.
'I would ask them not to take any more than they need, for any longer than they need.
'I offer the advice with a heavy heart and wish society would recognise that bureaucratic ineptitude and systematic delay has created an invitation and incentive to crime for people struggling to cope.'
He added that he felt society had failed the needy, and said it was far better they shoplift than turn to more degrading or violent options such as prostitution, mugging or burglary.
Read more:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1237470/Priest-advises-congregation-shoplift.html
Saturday, December 19, 2009
Pilgrimage to Shrine of St. Lazarus in Cuba
A pilgrimage combining two faith traditions has taken place in Cuba at the shrine of St Lazarus.
It is a religious event which has managed to continue uninterrupted, even in the face of oppression in the past.
Michael Voss reports from Havana.
See video images...
It is a religious event which has managed to continue uninterrupted, even in the face of oppression in the past.
Michael Voss reports from Havana.
See video images...
EWTN's Arroyo Hosts Reform CCHD Reps Who Reveal Shocking Evidence Against USCCB Anti-Poverty Arm
From Catholic Answers:
The ALL compilation is quite instructive; it links to the USCCB list of grantees as well. Skimming through the USCCB list of grantees and descriptions, I did a word search for "empower" and got 24 hits. Is that evil? No, but it means that the grantees are often more political than charitable in nature, usually associated with a "progressive" social agenda.
Link to original...
The ALL compilation is quite instructive; it links to the USCCB list of grantees as well. Skimming through the USCCB list of grantees and descriptions, I did a word search for "empower" and got 24 hits. Is that evil? No, but it means that the grantees are often more political than charitable in nature, usually associated with a "progressive" social agenda.
Link to original...
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Revolutionary Basque Priests Decry New Bishop
As was the case with Fr. Gerald Warner in Linz, this conservative Basque Bishop is being shouted down by a group of most revolutionary clerics with an animus delendi.
Madrid - Catholic priests in Spain's Basque region have taken the unusual step of criticizing Pope Benedict XVI's choice of bishop for San Sebastian, media reports said Wednesday.
Nearly 80 per cent of the priests in the diocese of the port city said Jose Ignacio Munilla, who is due to become bishop in January, was not 'suitable' for the post.
The priests issued a manifesto describing the choice of Munilla as 'discrediting the ecclesiastical life of our diocese.'
The protest, which was described as unprecedented in the recent history of Spain's Catholic Church, was believed to have a political background.
The Basque church is known as being relatively progressive and sympathetic to the Basque nationalist movement, which contains separatist currents.
Munilla, on the other hand, is known as being close to the conservative line of Madrid Cardinal Antonio Maria Rouco, head of the Spanish bishops' conference, who was believed to have recommended him to the pope.
'A part of the Basque church has shown more sympathy for the killers (of the violent separatist group ETA) than for their victims,' the daily El Mundo charged.
Read more: http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/europe/news/article_1519512.php/Basque-priests-reject-bishop-appointed-by-pope#ixzz0Zs7IBwQD
Madrid - Catholic priests in Spain's Basque region have taken the unusual step of criticizing Pope Benedict XVI's choice of bishop for San Sebastian, media reports said Wednesday.
Nearly 80 per cent of the priests in the diocese of the port city said Jose Ignacio Munilla, who is due to become bishop in January, was not 'suitable' for the post.
The priests issued a manifesto describing the choice of Munilla as 'discrediting the ecclesiastical life of our diocese.'
The protest, which was described as unprecedented in the recent history of Spain's Catholic Church, was believed to have a political background.
The Basque church is known as being relatively progressive and sympathetic to the Basque nationalist movement, which contains separatist currents.
Munilla, on the other hand, is known as being close to the conservative line of Madrid Cardinal Antonio Maria Rouco, head of the Spanish bishops' conference, who was believed to have recommended him to the pope.
'A part of the Basque church has shown more sympathy for the killers (of the violent separatist group ETA) than for their victims,' the daily El Mundo charged.
Read more: http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/europe/news/article_1519512.php/Basque-priests-reject-bishop-appointed-by-pope#ixzz0Zs7IBwQD
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Marxist Bishop has Close Contacts with Terrorist Group
By MICHAEL WARREN (AP) – 7 hours ago
ASUNCION, Paraguay — When he was a Roman Catholic bishop, Fernando Lugo taught liberation theology to uplift the poor. Now he is president, he has sent special forces into Paraguay's northern forests to hunt kidnappers whose leaders include a former student and his former altar boy.
The ties between Lugo and the kidnappers of a wealthy rancher are providing fuel for an effort to impeach the president, whose election last year ended 61 years of unbroken right-wing Colorado Party rule. Lugo's government calls it a hypocritical campaign by politicians who committed far worse sins under the nation's long and brutal dictatorship.
Lugo, known as "bishop of the poor," [it's just PR] was elected in large part for his advocacy of liberation theology, a Catholic movement that found inspiration in faith to push for social change, though the Vatican suppressed many versions and discouraged its teaching. Lugo renounced his church vows, saying he could do more for the poor as president than as bishop. [A most honest response for anyone who embrace Liberation Theology to do is to leave the Church, for if this Communist thinks he can do more as a political organizer than as a Bishop, he truly does not understand the mission of the Church]
The kidnapping of rancher Fidel Zavala to finance what the band has called a revolutionary movement for the poor now threatens to turn Lugo's past against him, taking his nonviolent idealism in a criminal direction.
The kidnappers — a group linked to several bank robberies and other kidnappings in the past decade — showed up Oct. 15 on Zavala's ranch wearing military uniforms and calling themselves the Paraguayan People's Army.
The rancher's family pleaded with Lugo not to send in the police, fearing Zavala would be killed. But Lugo is in a tough spot. He is accused by critics on the right of coddling the kidnappers while those on the left say he has potentially violated the rights of poor forest dwellers by sending in police armed with U.S.-provided anti-terror equipment.
"Fernando Lugo continues to be deeply tied to the kidnappers," Colorado Party Sen. Juan Carlos Galaverna declared on television last week. He accused the president not only of mentoring the future kidnappers, but continuing to act as their "chief, or at least the protector of the band."
Interior Minister Rafael Filizzola told The Associated Press that the allegation "defies common sense."
"They're trying to stigmatize the Paraguayan left because of this, but the left has always been nonviolent," he said. "The violence came from (Alfredo) Stroessner, a right-wing dictatorship that tortured and killed. The violence never came from the left, nor the church."
Filizzola described the kidnappers as dangerous. On Monday he asked Paraguay's Congress for $1 million to finance the special forces' overtime and to pay for tips on Zavala's whereabouts.
"We have the objective of finding them, capturing them and making them face justice," he said.
The kidnappers' leader, Osvaldo Villalba, has been a fugitive since 2001 after claiming a $2 million ransom to release the daughter-in-law of a former economy minister. Police later recovered $600,000 and arrested several members of the group, including his sister Carmen Villalba, who is among about 40 people serving long prison terms.
The Villalbas — eight brothers and sisters in all — were raised in poverty by a mother who trained as a nun in Europe and promoted liberation theology while working for a bishop who, like Lugo, provided some refuge to opponents of the brutal 1954-89 dictatorship.
While Lugo denies knowing any of the kidnappers personally, Monsignor Adalberto Martinez of Lugo's San Pedro diocese acknowledged that several probably studied in the seminary directed by Lugo in the 1990s. Osvaldo Villalba's brother Jose also told the AP that one of the leaders was Lugo's seminary student, and a former kidnapper, Dionisio Olazar, said another member of the band, Manuel Cristaldo Mieres, served as Lugo's altar boy.
According to Interior Minister Filizzola, the People's Army comprises a core of about 20 uniformed combatants with military training and heavy weapons, a larger group whose members hold day jobs but sometimes participate in crimes and a much larger group of backers who occasionally provide logistical support.
Filizzola rejects the idea that liberation theology inspired the gang to become kidnappers, and says there is little evidence of any guiding ideology since they began calling themselves guerrillas. [Denying the clear and obvious truth, since Lugo's former seminary students and an altar boy belong to the organization]
But the group clearly expresses political goals in pamphlets and statements delivered anonymously to local journalists. "We will look for radical and revolutionary changes, the only way to dignify the suffering and hunger of our poor people," one reads. [The same rhetoric of Liberation Theology]
Jose Villalba, a carpenter who also raises chickens and pigs on his subsistence farm, says armed revolution is a necessary response to extreme poverty.
"This president promised us poor people during his campaign that he would bring change, but now that he's in power, he doesn't do a thing," Villalba said by telephone from the village of Santa Rosa.
Lugo's opponents have cited Zavala's kidnapping as evidence of a "failure to fulfill his presidential duties," a vague but impeachable offense in Paraguay.
There were more than a dozen high-profile kidnappings during the previous president's tenure, and no one pushed for impeachment then, but the threat is real in Lugo's case because he has so little support in Congress — only three sure votes among 125 lawmakers.
Filizzola said using the Zavala case to push for Lugo's ouster "is an act of opportunism for the same people who supported the dictatorship, who supported political assassinations, tortures, persecutions."
Associated Press Writer Pedro Servin contributed to this report.
Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
ASUNCION, Paraguay — When he was a Roman Catholic bishop, Fernando Lugo taught liberation theology to uplift the poor. Now he is president, he has sent special forces into Paraguay's northern forests to hunt kidnappers whose leaders include a former student and his former altar boy.
The ties between Lugo and the kidnappers of a wealthy rancher are providing fuel for an effort to impeach the president, whose election last year ended 61 years of unbroken right-wing Colorado Party rule. Lugo's government calls it a hypocritical campaign by politicians who committed far worse sins under the nation's long and brutal dictatorship.
Lugo, known as "bishop of the poor," [it's just PR] was elected in large part for his advocacy of liberation theology, a Catholic movement that found inspiration in faith to push for social change, though the Vatican suppressed many versions and discouraged its teaching. Lugo renounced his church vows, saying he could do more for the poor as president than as bishop. [A most honest response for anyone who embrace Liberation Theology to do is to leave the Church, for if this Communist thinks he can do more as a political organizer than as a Bishop, he truly does not understand the mission of the Church]
The kidnapping of rancher Fidel Zavala to finance what the band has called a revolutionary movement for the poor now threatens to turn Lugo's past against him, taking his nonviolent idealism in a criminal direction.
The kidnappers — a group linked to several bank robberies and other kidnappings in the past decade — showed up Oct. 15 on Zavala's ranch wearing military uniforms and calling themselves the Paraguayan People's Army.
The rancher's family pleaded with Lugo not to send in the police, fearing Zavala would be killed. But Lugo is in a tough spot. He is accused by critics on the right of coddling the kidnappers while those on the left say he has potentially violated the rights of poor forest dwellers by sending in police armed with U.S.-provided anti-terror equipment.
"Fernando Lugo continues to be deeply tied to the kidnappers," Colorado Party Sen. Juan Carlos Galaverna declared on television last week. He accused the president not only of mentoring the future kidnappers, but continuing to act as their "chief, or at least the protector of the band."
Interior Minister Rafael Filizzola told The Associated Press that the allegation "defies common sense."
"They're trying to stigmatize the Paraguayan left because of this, but the left has always been nonviolent," he said. "The violence came from (Alfredo) Stroessner, a right-wing dictatorship that tortured and killed. The violence never came from the left, nor the church."
Filizzola described the kidnappers as dangerous. On Monday he asked Paraguay's Congress for $1 million to finance the special forces' overtime and to pay for tips on Zavala's whereabouts.
"We have the objective of finding them, capturing them and making them face justice," he said.
The kidnappers' leader, Osvaldo Villalba, has been a fugitive since 2001 after claiming a $2 million ransom to release the daughter-in-law of a former economy minister. Police later recovered $600,000 and arrested several members of the group, including his sister Carmen Villalba, who is among about 40 people serving long prison terms.
The Villalbas — eight brothers and sisters in all — were raised in poverty by a mother who trained as a nun in Europe and promoted liberation theology while working for a bishop who, like Lugo, provided some refuge to opponents of the brutal 1954-89 dictatorship.
While Lugo denies knowing any of the kidnappers personally, Monsignor Adalberto Martinez of Lugo's San Pedro diocese acknowledged that several probably studied in the seminary directed by Lugo in the 1990s. Osvaldo Villalba's brother Jose also told the AP that one of the leaders was Lugo's seminary student, and a former kidnapper, Dionisio Olazar, said another member of the band, Manuel Cristaldo Mieres, served as Lugo's altar boy.
According to Interior Minister Filizzola, the People's Army comprises a core of about 20 uniformed combatants with military training and heavy weapons, a larger group whose members hold day jobs but sometimes participate in crimes and a much larger group of backers who occasionally provide logistical support.
Filizzola rejects the idea that liberation theology inspired the gang to become kidnappers, and says there is little evidence of any guiding ideology since they began calling themselves guerrillas. [Denying the clear and obvious truth, since Lugo's former seminary students and an altar boy belong to the organization]
But the group clearly expresses political goals in pamphlets and statements delivered anonymously to local journalists. "We will look for radical and revolutionary changes, the only way to dignify the suffering and hunger of our poor people," one reads. [The same rhetoric of Liberation Theology]
Jose Villalba, a carpenter who also raises chickens and pigs on his subsistence farm, says armed revolution is a necessary response to extreme poverty.
"This president promised us poor people during his campaign that he would bring change, but now that he's in power, he doesn't do a thing," Villalba said by telephone from the village of Santa Rosa.
Lugo's opponents have cited Zavala's kidnapping as evidence of a "failure to fulfill his presidential duties," a vague but impeachable offense in Paraguay.
There were more than a dozen high-profile kidnappings during the previous president's tenure, and no one pushed for impeachment then, but the threat is real in Lugo's case because he has so little support in Congress — only three sure votes among 125 lawmakers.
Filizzola said using the Zavala case to push for Lugo's ouster "is an act of opportunism for the same people who supported the dictatorship, who supported political assassinations, tortures, persecutions."
Associated Press Writer Pedro Servin contributed to this report.
Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
Monday, December 7, 2009
Pope Benedict Warns of the Dangers of Liberation Theology
Vatican City, Dec 7, 2009 / 11:42 am (CNA).- In a meeting with a group of Brazilian bishops on Saturday, the Holy Father warned of the dangers of Marxist liberation theology and noted its grave consequences for ecclesial communities.
During the ad limina visit, the Pope recalled that “last August marked 25 years since the Instruction “Libertatis nuntius” of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, on certain aspects of liberation theology. The document "highlights the danger involved in the uncritical absorption, by certain theologians, of theses and methodologies that come from Marxism."
The Pope warned that the “more or less visible” scars of Marxist liberation theology, such as “rebellion, division, dissent, offenses, anarchy, are still being felt, causing great suffering and a grave loss of dynamic strength in your diocesan communities.”
For this reason, he exhorted all those who in some way feel attracted or affected by “certain deceitful principles of liberation theology” to re-visit the instruction and be open to the light that it can shed on the subject.
Benedict XVI also recalled that “the supreme rule of faith of the Church in effect arises from the unity that the Spirit established between Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture and the Magisterium of the Church, in such reciprocity that they cannot subsist independently of each other,” as John Paul II explained in his encyclical “Fides et Ratio.”
The Instruction “Libertatis nuntius” was published on August 6, 1984, with the approval of Pope John Paul II, by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
Its purpose was to focus the attention of pastors, theologians and all the faithful on the deviations of certain forms of liberation theology that are dangerous for the faith and for the Christian life and that are based on Marxist thought.
It warned that the grave ideological deviations of Marxist liberation theology inevitably lead to the betrayal of the cause of the poor and that a Marxist analysis of reality leads to the acceptance of positions that are incompatible with the Christian vision of man
link to original...
During the ad limina visit, the Pope recalled that “last August marked 25 years since the Instruction “Libertatis nuntius” of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, on certain aspects of liberation theology. The document "highlights the danger involved in the uncritical absorption, by certain theologians, of theses and methodologies that come from Marxism."
The Pope warned that the “more or less visible” scars of Marxist liberation theology, such as “rebellion, division, dissent, offenses, anarchy, are still being felt, causing great suffering and a grave loss of dynamic strength in your diocesan communities.”
For this reason, he exhorted all those who in some way feel attracted or affected by “certain deceitful principles of liberation theology” to re-visit the instruction and be open to the light that it can shed on the subject.
Benedict XVI also recalled that “the supreme rule of faith of the Church in effect arises from the unity that the Spirit established between Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture and the Magisterium of the Church, in such reciprocity that they cannot subsist independently of each other,” as John Paul II explained in his encyclical “Fides et Ratio.”
The Instruction “Libertatis nuntius” was published on August 6, 1984, with the approval of Pope John Paul II, by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
Its purpose was to focus the attention of pastors, theologians and all the faithful on the deviations of certain forms of liberation theology that are dangerous for the faith and for the Christian life and that are based on Marxist thought.
It warned that the grave ideological deviations of Marxist liberation theology inevitably lead to the betrayal of the cause of the poor and that a Marxist analysis of reality leads to the acceptance of positions that are incompatible with the Christian vision of man
link to original...
Saturday, December 5, 2009
The Forces of Liberalism Are Attacking the Church
John Allen writes in NCR on the Pope's "headaches" that Holy Father might need the aspirin of liberalism to remedy the old nationalist headaches of populists; is it Pat Buchanan he is thinking of as well as remote Lombards and Venetians? As we read this we thought about the comparison between populist Catholics, assuming our definition is the same as Allen's and that he means to actually slur conservative (read actual) Catholics as being synonymous with nationalists and fascists, many of whom never the less, echo Oriana Fellaci's instinctual but rationally formed concerns for European Civilization in relation to Islam. Interestingly, Allen correctly points out that many Italians in the North, particularly the more nationalistically and Catholic minded, perhaps echoing similar intellectual movements in France like the Action Française, cling strongly to their Catholic identity, yet do, as John Allen maintains, retain a certain degree of anti-clerical feeling. Well, in a sense, who can blame them and in another, one wishes for a higher motivation still, that they may realize after all that the globalists (Allen calls them "centralists") who are strongly represented in the Vatican are, if we are really honest with ourselves, liberals who favor stronger centralization, government control and diminution of the things that define the nation.
The real issue then, John Allen's posturing notwithstanding, is the brain tumor of modernism. Pain is a good thing. If populists are causing the Holy Father a "headache" it must only be nature reminding him that something is wrong, and that reforms are needed to restore the heart of Europe to its everlasting Christian youth.
There are some evil men like John Allen's masters behind the furor in the Sex Abuse Scandal in the developing world. Of course, the liberals behind all of this aren't making us aware of the absolute deprivation of the poor in places like South Africa and Rhodesia whose regimes they lobbied for vociferously for more than a decade. They're much more concerned in getting some headway against the Irish Church and robbing its money by using the abuse scandal as a reason. They're already in the process of absconding with some 166 Million from the Christian Brothers, and they've used a convenience of accounting in San Francisco to finagle another 14.4 Million.
No doubt, lusting after the Church's millions, the Irish Republican Government and Gordon Brown's Labor Government have, like the Martians in HG Well's sci-fi novel, feasted their covetous eyes on the property of the Catholic Church after their failed social programs have failed to yield heaven on earth and left hell instead.
Ironically, men of their type had more to do with the scandal than does the Catholic Church itself. These liberals will blame "secrecy", but the real issue is the liberalism, and this media event was manufactured by them to whip up anger against Ireland's oldest and wisest institution by forces no one, not least of all those who are angered by this, understand.
Abuse takes place in government (and private schools) at a much greater rate than they have in Catholic schools, but there's a difference. First of all, the Government isn't interested in creating another shortfall, other religious denominations don't have any money, at least not compared to Catholicism and besides, the Church teaches a lot of things that many Europeans despise and let's face it, put a damper on living in the sleek world of tomorrow without guilt and all that medieval stuff.
The Church is easily demonized and it's wealthy. It sounds like a recipe for nationalization of assets to us.
Pope, President, Archbishop to discuss abuse scandal in Dublin.
Protest in Dublin, by 10 people with VOTF, another self-interested organization that will harp on pre-ordained issues which actually have nothing to do with the problem. They will insist that "secrecy" and "medievalism" are the problems when the real problem is something they themselves embody: liberalism. It really is indicated by the fact that VOTF wants to "change the structure of the Church."
Hopefully the Church strikes back against this non-sense by pointing out the liberals in their midst, as they have with Senator Patrick Kennedy. We need to do the same with the Bishops whose mismanagement gave the pretext to the government in the first place.
PITTSBURGH -- Catholics from the Pittsburgh area teamed up with the Washington DC group Insurrecta Nex to protest at the office of Sen. Bob Casey.
The Friday protest was to ask Bishop David Zubik and all U.S. bishops to deny Communion to senators who vote for health care reform covering abortion.
“If you vote for this bill, there’s child killing in it, then you will not be able to receive Holy Communion,” said one protester. “We’re tired of the treachery and the cowardice of so-called Catholic politicians who rebel against the teachings of Christ.”
Zubik responded in a statement that said, “The Church … has the responsibility to protect the sacredness of the Eucharist from any abuse, inclusive of politicizing Communion. If a time came where I must engage any individual for any reason in regard to reception of the Eucharist, that would be solely between myself as pastor and that person as a member of my flock.”
Zubik went on to say it would not be debated publicly.
Link to article....
The real issue then, John Allen's posturing notwithstanding, is the brain tumor of modernism. Pain is a good thing. If populists are causing the Holy Father a "headache" it must only be nature reminding him that something is wrong, and that reforms are needed to restore the heart of Europe to its everlasting Christian youth.
There are some evil men like John Allen's masters behind the furor in the Sex Abuse Scandal in the developing world. Of course, the liberals behind all of this aren't making us aware of the absolute deprivation of the poor in places like South Africa and Rhodesia whose regimes they lobbied for vociferously for more than a decade. They're much more concerned in getting some headway against the Irish Church and robbing its money by using the abuse scandal as a reason. They're already in the process of absconding with some 166 Million from the Christian Brothers, and they've used a convenience of accounting in San Francisco to finagle another 14.4 Million.
No doubt, lusting after the Church's millions, the Irish Republican Government and Gordon Brown's Labor Government have, like the Martians in HG Well's sci-fi novel, feasted their covetous eyes on the property of the Catholic Church after their failed social programs have failed to yield heaven on earth and left hell instead.
Ironically, men of their type had more to do with the scandal than does the Catholic Church itself. These liberals will blame "secrecy", but the real issue is the liberalism, and this media event was manufactured by them to whip up anger against Ireland's oldest and wisest institution by forces no one, not least of all those who are angered by this, understand.
Abuse takes place in government (and private schools) at a much greater rate than they have in Catholic schools, but there's a difference. First of all, the Government isn't interested in creating another shortfall, other religious denominations don't have any money, at least not compared to Catholicism and besides, the Church teaches a lot of things that many Europeans despise and let's face it, put a damper on living in the sleek world of tomorrow without guilt and all that medieval stuff.
The Church is easily demonized and it's wealthy. It sounds like a recipe for nationalization of assets to us.
Pope, President, Archbishop to discuss abuse scandal in Dublin.
Protest in Dublin, by 10 people with VOTF, another self-interested organization that will harp on pre-ordained issues which actually have nothing to do with the problem. They will insist that "secrecy" and "medievalism" are the problems when the real problem is something they themselves embody: liberalism. It really is indicated by the fact that VOTF wants to "change the structure of the Church."
Hopefully the Church strikes back against this non-sense by pointing out the liberals in their midst, as they have with Senator Patrick Kennedy. We need to do the same with the Bishops whose mismanagement gave the pretext to the government in the first place.
PITTSBURGH -- Catholics from the Pittsburgh area teamed up with the Washington DC group Insurrecta Nex to protest at the office of Sen. Bob Casey.
The Friday protest was to ask Bishop David Zubik and all U.S. bishops to deny Communion to senators who vote for health care reform covering abortion.
“If you vote for this bill, there’s child killing in it, then you will not be able to receive Holy Communion,” said one protester. “We’re tired of the treachery and the cowardice of so-called Catholic politicians who rebel against the teachings of Christ.”
Zubik responded in a statement that said, “The Church … has the responsibility to protect the sacredness of the Eucharist from any abuse, inclusive of politicizing Communion. If a time came where I must engage any individual for any reason in regard to reception of the Eucharist, that would be solely between myself as pastor and that person as a member of my flock.”
Zubik went on to say it would not be debated publicly.
Link to article....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)