Papist Picture of the Day - 2/29/08

[For today's blog topics, click here.]

"Once again, the pope had managed to lose his signet ring."

[source: REUTERS/Tony Gentile (ITALY)]

Photo Caption Call - 2/29/08

[For today's blog topics, click here.]

"I bet this isn't what you think of when you hear the words 'Spring Break.'"

[source: Flickr user "lindita"]

*Breaking* Gunmen kidnap Iraqi Chaldean Catholic archbishop, kill companions

Breaking news:

Gunmen kidnapped the Chaldean Catholic archbishop of Mosul on Friday in the northern Iraqi city and killed his driver and two guards, police said.

"He was kidnapped in the al-Nour district in eastern Mosul when he left a church. Gunmen opened fire on the car, killed the other three and kidnapped the archbishop," said provincial police spokesman Brigadier-General Khaled Abdul Sattar.

An assistant to Cardinal Emmanuel III Delly, the Chaldean patriarch of Baghdad and spiritual leader of Iraq's Catholics, said they had heard three people were killed and they did not know the fate of the archbishop, [who is named] Paulos Faraj Rahho. - Reuters

The previous Archbishop of Mosul, Basil George Casmoussa, was kidnapped in 2005, "but was
released after one day of captivity and said no ransom was paid."

Updates as I see them.

Imagine the outcry from certain Muslims if one of their imams were kidnapped and his companions killed.

The Chaldean from Iraq who sent me this news story is asking us to pray for the captive Archbishop.

update: CWNews adds more:

Bishop Paulos Faraj Raho was seized by terrorists who attacked his car as he left the Holy Spirit cathedral in Mosul after leading the Stations of the Cross on Friday, February 29. Three companions who had been in the car with him were killed.

A Church spokesman in Iraq confirmed that the bishop was in the custody of his kidnappers, who had contacted the Chaldean Church to make a ransom demand. Iraqi Catholics did not know whether or not the bishop had been wounded in the attack.

update 2: the Vatican response:

Pope Benedict XVI called Friday for the swift release of a Chaldean Catholic archbishop who was kidnapped in Iraq, saying the "abominable" act was an attack on the Iraqi church as a whole.

In a statement, Benedict appealed for "reason and humanity" from the kidnappers, who killed the two bodyguards and the driver of Mosul Archbishop Paulos Faraj Rahho.

Rahho was kidnapped as he left church Friday afternoon. In the statement released by the Vatican press office, the Vatican said the fact that the gunmen knew Rahho was celebrating a religious rite inside indicated the kidnapping was premeditated.

The Vatican said the pope was immediately informed about the "abominable" kidnapping and was spiritually close to Rahho's family and the head of the Chaldean Catholic Church in Iraq, Cardinal Emmanuel III Delly.

New U.S. Ambassador to Vatican has first day on the job

More than mere pleasantries:

• Address: U.S. Ambassador Glendon to Benedict XVI
• Response: Pope Benedict XVI to Ambassador Glendon

CDF officially ends dispute on "baptisms" by "Creator, Liberator, Sustainer", etc.

Today the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith answered two recent disputed questions regarding allowable baptismal formulas and what to do with persons "baptized" using them:

Made public today were the responses of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to two questions concerning the validity of Baptism conferred with certain non-standard formulae.

The first question is: "Is a Baptism valid if conferred with the words 'I baptise you in the name of the Creator, and of the Redeemer, and of the Sanctifier', or 'I baptise you in the name of the Creator, and of the Liberator, and of the Sustainer'"?

The second question is: "Must people baptised with those formulae be baptised 'in forma absoluta'?"

The responses are: "To the first question, negative; to the second question, affirmative".

In other words: "no", baptism may not be validly celebrated using the above-mentioned substitutions for the traditional "Father, Son & Holy Spirit" phrasing, and "yes", people baptized with this substitute phrasing must be baptized absolutely, as opposed to conditionally (conditionally would imply that their previous baptism might have been valid. The CDF says they are absolutely not valid).

Pope Benedict personally approved these answers. Cardinal Levada, who is in charge of CDF, and Archbishop Amato, the no. 2 in charge of CDF, explain the decision (underlining mine):

An attached note explains that the responses "concern the validity of Baptism conferred with two English-language formulae within the ambit of the Catholic Church. ... Clearly, the question does not concern English but the formula itself, which could also be expressed in another language".

"Baptism conferred in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit", the note continues, "obeys Jesus' command as it appears at the end of the Gospel of St. Matthew. ... The baptismal formula must be an adequate expression of Trinitarian faith, approximate formulae are unacceptable.

"Variations to the baptismal formula - using non-biblical designations of the Divine Persons - as considered in this reply, arise from so-called feminist theology", being an attempt "to avoid using the words Father and Son which are held to be chauvinistic, substituting them with other names. Such variants, however, undermine faith in the Trinity".

I'm glad the response makes clear that this false practice came about because of "so-called feminist theology" (theology is theology, there is no such thing as "feminist" or "masculine" theology).

And if you had any doubt about the theological weight this opinion holds, consider:

"The response of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith constitutes an authentic doctrinal declaration, which has wide-ranging canonical and pastoral effects. Indeed, the reply implicitly affirms that people who have been baptised, or who will in the future be baptised, with the formulae in question have, in reality, not been baptised. Hence, they must them be treated for all canonical and pastoral purposes with the same juridical criteria as people whom the Code of Canon Law places in the general category of 'non-baptised'".

That's pretty airtight, but won't prevent the obligatory outraged editorial responses.

Trust me, they're coming.

{updated} To review, CNS confirms that people who have been "baptized" without the proper Trinitarian form of the Sacrament must now be "re-baptized" and confirmed. They must be "re-baptized" before they can be re-admitted to recieving the Eucharist. Furthermore, they must, if married, now receive that Sacrament of Matrimony. If any of them men baptized with this invalid formula were ordained to Holy Orders, they must now be actually ordained.

In short, it's a huge mess.

Plus, people who continue invalidly baptizing with these invalid formulas incur certain penalties. Protestants, to make another point, who have been baptized with one of these invalid formulas, cannot be presumed to share in Christian baptism with Catholics. It's quite a can of worms.

Finally, some folks have mentioned the idea of "ecclesia supplet" as providing a solution to the dilemma posed when people operate and live with the belief that they have received Sacraments, which, in reality, they have not undergone.

That isn't quite correct, but don't lose hope: the proper Catholic theological response in this situation is that "Deus providet" - God provides. Canonist Ed Peters explains how/why in this post (jump down to the section heading 'So where does that leave our penitent?').

He also explains the background to this particular debate, and makes some helpful comments today:

"The rules on baptism are meant to be followed"

You might recall when I blogged against using baptismal formulae contrived to avoid masculine nouns for Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. I said back in 2004 that such ‘baptisms’ were invalid, and that people who received ‘baptism’ under them were not even Christian, let alone Catholic.

Looks like CDF agrees.

This type of invalid "baptism" was most notably practiced in Australia over the past decade:

• CathNews: Brisbane Archbishop stops "inclusive" baptism
• Catholic New Times: Cardinal Pell backs stand against 'invalid' baptisms
• ABC News: Brisbane church on notice over unconventional baptisms

And for a glimpse into the mindset that prompted this liturgical abuse, consider these lines from the "Australian Reforming Catholics" website (with emphasis on the "reforming"):

"If the words "Creator, Liberator and Sustainer" enable some people to come closer to the meaning of the Trinity, then why should there be such a problem if people have a choice about the way it is expressed? Our understanding is that not all people are baptised at the South Brisbane Church with these words and if some are assisted in faith through their usage, then there should be concentration on what is most important."

The proper way to approach the meaning of the Trinity is catachesis. The proper way to approach the reality of the Trinity, and of eternal life, is to call upon the Trinity by their revealed names in the sacrament of baptism. This is what is most important: that faith be founded on reality as well as feeling.

After all, feelings don't save - but God does.

Looks like CDF agrees.

[photo: Flickr user "praiseyah"]

Video: Planned Parenthood Racism Investigation

Because it's always more effective to hear it and see it:



Previous and related posts on Planned Parenthood here.

[ph/t: Hot Air.]

Spanish bishop: Abstain from text messages this Lent

'The Diocese of Girona in Spain, together with Caritas Girona, is calling on young people to “abstain” from sending text messages during Lent—which ends on March 20—as part of the Lenten campaign called “Disconnect to get connected.”

The campaign encourages young people aged 14 to 30 to give up three text messages per day and to spend less time connected to the internet during the forty days of Lent." - CNA

Of course, time spent reading AmP or related AmP pages doesn't count as internet time. ;-)

AmP headlines by text alert, hmm, now that's an (intrusive) idea....

Here's a question: how many of you give up Facebook, internet, cell phone chatting or yes - texting - for Lent? Do you try to limit your use of all or any of these technologies?

[photo: flickr user "andreasandrews"]

Leap year saints!

Fr. Nicholas at Roman Miscellany:

The 2004 Roman Martyrology lists four saints for today, who are thus only commemorated (technically) once every four years. Let's especially pray to them on their feast.

[He lists them here.]

Very cool.

Announcing the AmP Facebook Fanpage!

Recently Facebook approved my request for an exciting new AmericanPapist online initiative: the official AmP fanpage.

For those of you who have Facebook accounts (they are free and open to all), you can now become an official fan of AmericanPapist with a single click. This will allow you to do several things, for instance:

• View the latest Papist Picture of the Day and AmP Blog topics from within Facebook
• Participate in papist discussions with other AmP fans, and post tips on the fanpage wall
• Create and share your own papist photo albums for the AmP fanpage
• Learn about exciting upcoming papist events, and find out if other AmP fans are attending
• Help support and spread the good news about AmP and other Catholic blogs

... and that's just a start! Becoming a AmP Facebook fan is fast and easy, and I promise not to fill your inbox with annoying messages. So join today, invite your friends, and start getting involved. It's a papist paradise!

In related news, the AmP YouTube channel, after roughly one month of operation, has logged over 10,000 video views, with +1500 channel views! The AmP Flickr page has clocked well past 20,000 views since launching.

I don't think it's unreasonable to hope for 500 fans by March 15th. So, what do you say? Let's get to it!

update: March 2nd, and we're almost tipping the scales at 200 official AmP Facebook fans!

Picture: Meet "Benny Bear", the first official souvenir for the pope's visit

USA Today:

"The first officially announced souvenir for Pope Benedict XVI's visit is the "Benny Bear." That's the nickname Archdiocese of Washington spokeswoman Susan Gibbs gave the bear, which will be sold only at six Washington, D.C.-area Build-A-Bear Workshop stores. "It's cute. It's fun. It brings the Holy Father into secular culture and lets parents go into a family-friendly store and do something related to their faith," Gibbs says.

The bears costs $10 to $20. The Christ Our Hope logo T-shirt costs $6, and a portion of the shirt sales will help pay for the pope's trip."

"Daddy, I want an umpa lumpa...."

No worries, a (slightly) more substantial post about the pope's April visit is in the works.

Keep Planned Parenthood funding in VA cut off!

This is an important story. I don't have time at present to pursue it fully, but briefly:

• The Virginia Senate voted yesterday to cut off state aid to Planned Parenthood
• PP, in response, is now mobilizing their significant resources to fight the decision
• LifeSiteNews reports and points to this site in Virginia: http://familyfoundation.org
• ProLifeBlogs has coverage, and notes that PP has sent an action notice to its supporters
• An example of the misinformation being spread available in this post at RH Reality Check

People more directly connected to this situation than I are welcome to continue coverage in the comment box.

Social Encyclical expected as early as Easter, Cardinal Bertone confirms

CNA reports:

The Vatican's Secretary of State, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, confirmed today that Pope Benedict XVI is about to finish his Encyclical on social issues.

"Yes, the Pope is working on a social encyclical, which will have, I believe, a significant impact on the great social and economic problems in the contemporary world," said Cardinal Bertone during an interview published today by the Italian daily "La Repubblica."

....

The Secretary of State gave no clue as to when the document will be released, but unnamed sources from the Vatican quoted previously by the daily "Il Messaggero," said the third encyclical of Pope Benedict would be signed on the feast of St. Joseph –March 19th - and released during Easter.

"The encyclical will focus on international social problems, with special attention to developing countries," Cardinal Bertone told "La Repubblica."

Talking points for his April visit?

Recent reports suggest global cooling + increases in arctic ice

Because I'm feeling somewhat masochistic and this topic always gets heated:

"Heart-ache: Temperature records indicate … global cooling?" - Hot Air

Quoting this article:

"All four major global temperature tracking outlets (Hadley, NASA’s GISS, UAH, RSS) have released updated data. All show that over the past year, global temperatures have dropped precipitously…

Scientists quoted in a past DailyTech article link the cooling to reduced solar activity which they claim is a much larger driver of climate change than man-made greenhouse gases. The dramatic cooling seen in just 12 months time seems to bear that out. While the data doesn’t itself disprove that carbon dioxide is acting to warm the planet, it does demonstrate clearly that more powerful factors are now cooling it."

Now, hold onto your fur coats, I agree with this article that says "one winter does not a climate make." However, can we also agree on this observation?:

" ... if environmentalists and environment reporters can run around shrieking about the manmade destruction of the natural order every time a robin shows up on Georgian Bay two weeks early, then it is at least fair game to use this winter's weather stories to wonder whether the alarmist are being a tad premature.

That's really all I ask, at this point.

Your daily dose of radical feminist scare tactics

In response to the Virgina Senate cutting state funding to Planned Parenthood (bold in original):

"The irony is, Planned Parenthood probably prevents more abortions than any other organization in the country," [an opposed Senator] said. But of course, anti-choicers aren't concerned about preventing abortion - if they were, they'd be touting birth control - their real concern is limiting women's choices and rolling back our rights. - Feministing

Meanwhile, the enlightened sensitivas at Feministe try to work out the logic of early human life (warning: offensive images and content). Not surprisingly, they fail miserably.

I've said it often: if you were ever tempted to hold a different position on these issues, just spend an afternoon reading where it leads and you'll never be tempted again. Simply incredible.

But also, very sad.

update: Jessica at Feministing provides more grist, this time in reaction to the news that Planned Parenthood in Idaho willing takes money from racists to abort African American babies:

"What so awful about this .... is that this plays directly into anti-choice talking points about abortion and race. "

Or, just maybe, the "talking points" actually reveal a reality that PP tries to hide whenever it can.

Planned Parenthood's response? "We're an equal-opportunity, non-discriminatory purveyor of death."

Okay, that phrase was mine.

Report/Interview: Fidelity works against AIDS in Africa

In the fight against AIDS, abstinence-based programs that focus on changing behaviors rather than handing out condoms simply work better, says an AIDS expert.

Matthew Hanley has been a HIV/AIDS technical adviser at Catholic Relief Services (CRS) for the last seven years and is the author of the forthcoming book "Avoiding Risk, Affirming Life: Science, Love, and AIDS."

In this interview with ZENIT, Hanley comments on the programs and principles that have led to dropping rates of HIV prevalence in Africa.

Remember, so-called "abstinence" programs are the most effective because they are actually "abstinence and fidelity" programs. The Church isn't saying to people "never have sex," it is saying, "Have sex, but in the right way (an exclusive marriage)." This messages preserves both human life and the dignity of humans.

Or you could employ the alternative approach - just throw condoms and contraceptives at the problem.

And yet, it's the Catholic Church that is constantly maligned for being "uncivilized." Good one!

Video: Barack Obama on Terri Schiavo

Video of Barack Obama's comments on Terri Schivo:

My full commentary on this story is available here.

related: "Obama pledged to Planned Parenthood: “I will not yield” to pro-life concerns" (CNA):

The senator said he had a long tradition of support for legalized abortion, citing his efforts in the Illinois State Senate and his classes as a law professor. “I have worked on these issues for decades now,” he said. “I put Roe at the center of my lesson plan on reproductive freedom when I taught Constitutional Law. Not simply as a case about privacy but as part of the broader struggle for women’s equality.”

...

Senator Obama said he was “absolutely convinced that culture wars are so nineties,” saying it was “time to turn the page.”

“We’re tired about arguing about the same ole’ stuff,” he continued.

update 2: "Obama Under Fire for Terri Schiavo Remark"- Christian Post

Photo Caption Call - 2/27/08

[For today's blog topics, click here.]

"Guess who the Patriarch has on his fav five?"

[source: Flickr user "guzi4real"]

Papist Picture of the Day - 2/27/08

[For today's blog topics, click here.]

"The post meeting rush to get a picture with the pope is always fierce."

[source: REUTERS/Tony Gentile (ITALY)]

Joe Feuerherd gets himself into hot water

Two quick updates:

• Catholic News Agency presents again the argument published at the In the Light of the Law blog, and then takes a second opinion by J. D. Flynn, a canon lawyer for the Archdiocese of Denver.
• More importantly, Sister Mary Ann Walsh of the USCCB has replied in the WaPo.

This story was first mentioned indirectly here and then at more length and directly here.

It will be interesting to see if Feuerherd tries to mount a response to the wave of criticism he's received.

Obama's biggest regret? Not more energetically letting Terri Schiavo die.

In last night's democratic debate between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama - their last one before the Texas/Ohio showdown on March 4th - Barack Obama made a surprising (to me, shocking) statement:

RUSSERT: Senator Obama, any statements or vote you'd like to takeback?

OBAMA: Well, you know, when I first arrived in the Senate that first year, we had a situation surrounding Terri Schiavo. And I remember how we adjourned with a unanimous agreement that eventually allowed Congress to interject itself into that decision making process of the families. It wasn't something I was comfortable with, but it was not something that I stood on the floor and stopped. And I think that was a mistake, and I think the American people understood that that was a mistake. And as a constitutional law professor, I knew better. And so that's an example I think of where inaction...

RUSSERT: This is the young woman with the feeding tube...

OBAMA: That's exactly right.

RUSSERT: ... and the family disagreed as to whether it should be removed or not.

OBAMA: And I think that's an example of inaction, and sometimes that can be as costly as action.

Obama's choice of example and statement about the Terri Schiavo case confound me quite a bit. For one thing, this represents a clear case of him reaching out to an extreme position, and therefore distancing himself from the more conservative position on end-of-life issues that many Americans hold, thus reminding us how liberal Obama actually is on these types of issues. He went looking for it.

Furthermore, the proposition that "the American people understood that [getting involved in the Terri Schiavo case] was a mistake" I don't personally agree with, and at any rate, I'd like to see the poll numbers on it. Since when did this become a consensus position, that it is wrong for there to be laws to protect the disabled from having their ordinary care and nutrition removed?!

Regardless, Obama's lack of action was ultimately fruitless, as Schiavo did indeed have her feeding tube removed and was indeed starved to death, several legal battles later.

In the end, all Obama managed to do with his response to the moderator's question was to inform the American people, "Yes, I was in favor of letting Terri Schiavo be starved to death."

If anything, that was the inaction he chose: not helping Terri live.

LifeNews points out that Obama, in fact, said basically the same thing back in 2007:

This isn't the first time Obama has said the biggest mistake he made as senator was voting to help try to stop Terri from being euthanized.

During an April 2007 debate, Obama said, "I think professionally the biggest mistake that I made was when I first arrived in the Senate. There was a debate about Terri Schiavo, and a lot of us, including me, left the Senate with a bill that allowed Congress to intrude where it shouldn't have.”

"And I think I should have stayed in the Senate and fought more for making sure [Terri's parents couldn't take their case to federal court to save her life]," he explained.

Again, it's scary to think that Obama has to say this sort of thing to win over democratic voters.

Kathryn Jean Lopez at NRO's The Corner has this to say:

"I thought Terri Schiavo was a jarring presence at the debate last night. When Senator Obama was asked what legislative regrets, he didn’t try to walk away from his radical ways any by citing his votes against born-alive infant protection or against banning the transport of children across state lines to circumvent parental notification/consent laws. Instead he said he would have voted to stop Congress from intervening to save the life of Terri Schiavo.

On Meet the Press, John McCain left open the possibility that Congress wasn't wrong to get involved. He should embrace life (and autonomy!) and get comfortable with running against Barack Obama, a radical on these issues."

To which Andrew Sullivan responds "is she nuts?"

Oh wait, that's right, McCain shouldn't point out Obama's anti-life positions, that would be foolish.

If anyone has YouTube or other embedded video of Obama's response, I'd appreciate the link.

update: coincidentally, look at what the Vatican was just wrapping-up yesterday:

"The Pontifical Academy for Life has concluded a 2-day conference on ethical and pastoral questions involving care for those who are terminally ill.

... At the conclusion of the conference one participant, Dr. John Haas of the National Catholic Bioethics Center, told Vatican Radio that a key concern had been the desire to counteract mounting pressure for euthanasia in the case of patients who are terminally ill. The spreading acceptance of euthanasia, he said, is the result of a utilitarian approach to human life that is "increasingly dominant" in medical circles." -