American Papist: Not Your Average Catholic!

Papist Picture of the Day - 7/2/09

2009-07-02T18:00:00.003-04:00

Breaking: Doug Kmiec appointed ambassador to Malta
Update: Obama meets with Catholic reporters
On APP: How abortion might be snuck into government health care
Outrageous: Offered as "common ground": How a Late-Term Abortion Saved My Life
Noteworthy: Obama meets with Catholic press today
Huh? After six months in DC, the Obama's are still looking for a Church
Important: Abp. Chaput, other Legion visitors appointed by Vatican (full details added)

Some kids just never learn how to pay attention in Mass.

[source: Reuters]

Breaking: Doug Kmiec appointed ambassador to Malta

2009-07-02T15:30:00.003-04:00

That is what Catholic News Service is currently claiming via Twitter.

Malta sounds like a fun vacation spot. Kmiec is at long last getting his payback from the Obama administration for his protracted support.

Of course, Malta is a 98% Catholic country which bans abortion and protects marriage by law. Since Kmiec is good at catching the drift of the prevailing winds, Malta actually seems like a good choice for his exile. It'll be easy for him to argue the status quo.

Report: Obama meets with Catholic reporters

2009-07-02T14:30:00.002-04:00

As I reported earlier today, this morning Obama met with representatives of Catholic newspapers, and CNS has a report.

The list of organizations in attendance was a who's-who list of liberal Catholic print publications, with just enough Conservative publishers to appear balanced (actually, just one - the National Catholic Register, because Vatican Radio isn't American and CNS is USCCB-sponsored, and therefore an obvious choice).

Anyway, not only were liberal publications National Catholic Reporter and America magazine invited (which I predicted), but also Commonweal and Catholic Digest. A religion reporter from Washington Post was invited as well. Of course, no invitation was extended to Catholic World Report or Our Sunday Visitor - they might ask awkward questions, you see.

As for what was said, it is so discouraging to see that Obama continues to bring up the example of Cardinal Bernardin unchallenged. Today he told the Catholic reporters that "his encounters with the cardinal continue to influence him, particularly [the cardinal's] "seamless garment" approach to a multitude of social justice issues."

Obviously, Obama is choosing to be selectively influenced, because Cardinal Bernardin himself went on record with the National Catholic Register in 1988 and said: ""I don't see how you can subscribe to the consistent ethic and ... [feel] that abortion is a 'basic right' of the individual."

Cardinal Bernardin went on to say in that same interview:

"I know that some people on the left, if I may use that label, have used the consistent ethic to give the impression that the abortion issue is not all that important anymore, that you should be against abortion in a general way but that there are more important issues, so don't hold anybody's feet to the fire just on abortion. That's a misuse of the consistent ethic, and I deplore it."

Now, if ever there was a golden opportunity to ask Obama what he would say in response to these words of Cardinal Bernardin's, it was this morning when the current publisher of the same magazine which originally published the Cardinal's words - Fr. Owen Kearns of the National Catholic Register - was seated at a table where Obama, once again, began to claim the mantle of Cardinal Bernardin.

... but I bet you it didn't happen. And that's why people like me are not invited to Obama's meetings. Because there are some questions he can't handle, and his team knows who to invite to ensure those questions don't get asked.

Some "listening session."

update: National Catholic Register's Tim Drake with Fr. Owen Kearns take on the meeting. Each participant was allowed to ask one question. I'd like to hear what was asked, and how Obama responded.

On APP: How abortion might be snuck into government health care

2009-07-02T13:00:00.002-04:00

Over at the American Principles Project blog, I explain how I think abortion coverage might be included in the new government health care plan being debated in the House of Representatives. Scary stuff.

I also include information on how to contact the members of the Senate Finance Committee who could make sure it isn't included. Abortions aren't "basic coverage", and we shouldn't have to pay for them.

Offered as "common ground": How a Late-Term Abortion Saved My Life

2009-07-02T11:00:00.005-04:00

I might not do this perfectly, but I think it needs to be done.

I've been keeping tabs on Reproductive Health Reality Check (RHRC) since they announced a "common ground" forum on abortion.

Problem is, if pro-lifers want to head East towards life and pro-aborts want to move West towards the death of unborn children, any turning to the center of common ground by pro-lifers is movement in the wrong direction.

My patience and sincere attempt to be understanding and open to RHRC's common ground forum is about out. What might be the breaking point is a piece by Cecily Kellogg, who describes herself on her blog as a "foul-mouthed liberal, feminist, fat, recovering alcoholic, mother, wife, woman and writer."

So what did this individual contribute to RHRC?

"How a Late-Term Abortion Saved My Life"

It turns out to be yet another eulogy for late-term abortionist George Tiller, and a defense of late-term abortions in general. Now, because she makes her case based on her own personal experience, I have to talk about that to make my points.

Tiller, she claims "was committed to his work." Why? She says, "because he believed 'abortion is a matter of survival for women.'" I'd like to find out how many of his abortions saved women's lives. I know every one of his abortions killed a child. But that's not fair for me to say, apparently. That's not acceptable common ground. And yet it is acceptable for Kellogg to claim that Tiller "saved" lives.

She proceeds to narrate her nightmare story of succumbing to sever preeclampsia, which resulted in her doctors saying if she did not "terminate" her pregnancy, she was going to die "immediately."

After this experience (she had her son killed through "intact dialation and extraction") she "searched and found other women like me -- women whose lives were saved by the late-term medical termination of a pregnancy. I also met women who chose to spare their children from agonizing health conditions and birth defects by having an abortion."

... wait a second though, Kellogg just jumped from abortions which aim to preserve the life of the mother over into abortions for genetic disease and birth defects. That's called eugenics. And who wishes to be "spared" from their problems through death? When she came down with severe preeclampsia - an "agonizing health condition" (in her own words) - would she have wished to be "spared" from it ... by death? This sort of thinking isn't merely unacceptable common ground, it's insane and inhuman.

Kellogg, in her ideological quest to eulogize Tiller and all the evil things he stood for, jumps more logical tracks: "... doctors only perform [late term abortions] in cases of extreme medical need. Dr. Tiller himself never performed a late term abortion without counseling the parents -- and getting a second opinion from another doctor. My doctor described the day of my surgery as the worst in his professional career."

And yet Dr. Tiller did not only perform late term abortions in "extreme medical need." He did them at will. And what does Kellogg mean by Tiller "counseling the parents"? Of course he "counseled" them; late-term abortion is a major medical procedure! Kellogg's doctor might have had a hard day, but Tiller did this every day - he chose it. And just what, might I ask, is so hard about this decision, if Kellogg truly made the "right" one? If late-term abortion is medically "necessary", what need can there be for second opinions, counseling of options, etc?

Kellogg's last sentence is especially deceptive and indeed, manipulative:

"My doctor knew the procedure and was willing to perform it; something that has already become rare and will be rarer still if doctors have to put their lives on the line to perform this life saving medical procedure. If it's you or your daughter, will you be so lucky?"

Quite honestly: how dare she say that. She paints abortionists as heroes who "put their lives on the line to perform this live saving medical procedure." However, medical situations in which the woman's life can only be saved by a late-term abortion are incredibly rare. They represent a failure in medicine. The answer to "medically necessary" abortions is to make them medically unnecessary. That is the challenge. Her manipulative "if it's you or your daughter, will you be so lucky?" is about as honest as claiming we need to kill all the sharks in the world because one of them might take a bite out of you or your daughter.

Finally, at a deeper level, Kellogg's argument is one of exception. And honestly, you could not find a more extreme exception than the personal one she describes. Through this exception, where she chose to have her son half-birthed, and have his brains vacuumed out, she proceeds to argue that George Tiller was a hero for doing this to dozens (if not hundreds) of children, and then she even has the nerve to scare her readers into wanting this "right" to be preserved for mothers and their daughters.

This is not common ground. It's a repulsive trick.

It's especially repulsive because Kellogg is presuming that no one will dare disagree with her because, by inference, she can claim they "want" her to die or would "be okay" with it.

Well of course I don't want her to die. I desperately want her, and all innocent human beings, to live. But I cannot condone her killing of another person to ensure the continuation of her own life. And I will not stand by and allow her to use the choice she made to preserve her life as a false justification for killing other innocent lives, including and up to those lives which are in no way threatening another person - such as the sick and disabled.

As I said at the outset, there are pro-abortionists who want me to move West, but I wish to move East. Meeting her in the "common ground" she offers of allowing late-term abortions, is a step in the wrong direction. It's a step towards death.

Related: Mary Davenport, MD asks "Is Late-Term Abortion Ever Necessary?"

Noteworthy: Obama meets with Catholic press today

2009-07-02T10:00:00.004-04:00

Fascinating, noteworthy news from National Catholic Register's Tim Drake:

[Today] at 10:45 Eastern time, the president is hosting a round table at the White House for members of the Catholic press.

The National Catholic Register’s publisher, Father Owen Kearns, will be among eight religion reporters and editors in attendance at that gathering.

The purpose of the gathering, according to Chris Hensman, press secretary with the National Security Council, is a “preview of the president’s upcoming visit with Pope Benedict XVI.” The president is meeting with the Pope on July 10.

Father Kearns just received the invitation to the meeting yesterday via e-mail. At this point, there isn’t a complete list of the media who will be in attendance, but our understanding is that it’s strictly Catholic print media, not radio or television.

According to Father Kearns, the meeting is unprecedented. He has not previously met a sitting U.S. president, nor has he been previously invited by the president to a White House gathering for members of the Catholic press.

When Father Kearns asked the purpose of the round table, he was told, “It’s for the president to inform us, to listen to concerns, and to answer questions.”

The meeting is not a press conference.

“It sounds like what we would call a listening session,” said Father Kearns.

This move provokes many questions for me. What are the other eight organizations invited? Why did the Obama team think this would be a good move? How is the Obama team preparing for his meeting with the Pope in eight days? Does he see these organizations as a resource to prepare for that meeting and to ensure he says the right things?

And why just print organizations (and not widely-read Catholic blogs - *cough, cough*)? Could it be because some of Obama's most staunch defenders are liberal print publications such as National Catholic Reporter and America magazine? I'm surprised, if they were invited, that they have not trumpeted the fact yet.

On the other hand, this was done under extremely short notice.

Well, time will tell, so check back here later in the day.

And PS - for future reference, I'm just right up the street from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and can pass CIA clearances.

I'm just sayin'...

After six months in DC, the Obamas are still looking for a Church

2009-07-02T09:00:00.003-04:00

On Tuesday Amy Sullivan claimed in Time Magazine that the Obama family had settled on Camp David (well outside DC):

The Obamas have finally ended the speculation about which D.C. church they would join - by picking none of them, Amy Sullivan reports in Time magazine. Instead, President Obama has reportedly decided to make the same choice as George W. Bush, and worship at Evergreen Chapel, the nondenominational church at Camp David.

Given that the Obamas have appeared comfortable and even eager to be out in the city and part of the D.C. community, there had been some expectation that they would join a local church. They had even visited a couple of D.C. churches already. (DCist)

However, a White House spokesman quickly issued a statement repudiating Sullivan's claim (good work, Amy):

The President and First Family continue to look for a church home. They have enjoyed worshipping at Camp David and several other congregations over the months, and will choose a church at the time that is best for their family,” Deputy White House Press Secretary Jennifer Psaki said in a statement.

In addition to services at Camp David, the President and Mrs. Obama have attended a local Baptist church and celebrated Easter at St. John’s Episcopal Church across the street from the White House. Word that the Obamas would attend the Baptist church became public, drawing a large crowd and making it difficult for regular church attendees to find seats. And tourists inside the church reportedly snapped pictures of the President while he attended St. John’s. (Christian Science Monitor)

I know Catholics can sometimes "parish shop" when they get into a new city, but Barack and Michelle seem to denomination shop. In the meantime, they don't appear to be losing much sleep over being liturgically homeless.

Breaking: Abp. Chaput, other Legion visitors appointed by Vatican (full details added)

2009-07-01T13:30:00.009-04:00

Sandro Magister reports - an extremely reliable source:

Last March, the announcement; July 15th, the go-ahead. The apostolic visitors of the Legion of Christ will interview the priests and religious of the congregation founded by the Mexican priest Marcial Maciel Degollado, in shock because of the admitted evil conduct of their very own founder, sanctioned in 2006 for sexual abuse, and now, a year after his death, discovered to have had a lover and a daughter in Spain.

The long-awaited names:

– Ricardo Watti Urquidi, Bishop of Tepic, Mexico, in charge of Mexico and Central America, where the Legion has 44 houses, 250 priests and 115-120 religious seminarians; (bottom right)

– Charles J. Chaput, Archbishop of Denver, in charge of the United States and Canada, where the Legion has 24 houses, 130 priests and 260 religious seminarians; (bottom left)

– Giuseppe Versaldi, Bishop of Alessandria, in charge of Italy, Israel, the Philippines, and South Korea, where the Legion has 16 houses, 200 priests and 420 religious seminarians. (in Italy 13, 168 and 418 respectively); (upper middle)

– Ricardo Ezzati Andrello, Archbishop of Concepción, Chile, in charge of Chile, Argentina, Colombia, Brazil and Venezuela, where the Legion has 20 houses, 122 priests and 122 religious seminarians; (upper right)

– Ricardo Blázquez Pérez, Bishop of Bilbao, Spain, in charge of Spain, France, Germany, Switzerland, Ireland, Holland, Poland, Austria and Hungary, where the Legion has 20 houses, 105 priest, and 160 religious seminarians. (upper left)

More details:

The investiture of the five visitors took place on Saturday morning, June 27th in the Vatican, at a meeting with Cardinals Tarcisio Bertone, William J. Levada, Franc Rodé and Stanislaw Rylko. The five were give a letter containing the conclusions for the investigation of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith which lead to Maciel’s being sanctioned in 2006. Each prelate was given a travel budget of 10,000 Euros.

They are to submit their first report to the Vatican by fall of this year.

update: these rumors have been percolating in Spanish-language press for some time, in El Universal on June 27, and June 28, and InfoCatolica (picking up on Magister's piece) today.

I would say that it is unqualified good news that Archbishop Chaput has been chosen to oversee the Legion visitation in the United States. AmP readers who have been following this story will remember that I reported back in early May that Abp. Chaput would be the Vatican pick. His personal experience of formation in religious life especially qualifies him to examine Legion policy.

Two things to watch for: finances. The Hartford Courant recently posted an article on the relatives of a deceased woman challenging the donation of her estate (upwards of $7.5 million) to the Legion in the U.S.

Second: defections. I'm tracking numerous reports of individual (and groups of) priests, seminarians and consecrated people actively seeking ways to the leave the Legion and incorporate into dioceses, seminaries and other Catholic institutions. More of these will happen depending on what the Vatican investigation reveals.

Neither of these situations is being helped (from the Legion side of things) by new details which have emerged about Maciel's not double life, but "triple." Especially concerning is the insistence of these sources that current leaders in the movement were aware of Maciel's sins before they leaked to the public or lower members within the Legion.

update 2: I should be clear that I do not agree with everything claimed in the link above ("new details which have emerged about Maciel's not double life, but "triple""), but merely with the claims that Maciel used Legion money to fund his affair(s?) and that this activity was known to associates who still hold active roles in the movement.

update 3: CNA confirms/clarifies: "Sources at the Holy See confirmed to CNA the accuracy of Magister’s report and said a public announcement would be made on July 15. Sources also said that contrary to the article, Cardinal Stanislaw Rylko was not present at the meeting."

My exhaustive coverage of this story, as the first large Catholic internet portal to break the news, can be found here.

Papist Picture of the Day - 7/1/09

2009-07-01T13:00:00.000-04:00

Tim the Seminarian took the job of sacristan very seriously.

[source: AP Photo]

Noted: Thoughts of a Canon Lawyer on L'OR, Milingo, and SSPX

2009-07-01T12:00:00.001-04:00

My father has had some excellent posts of late, which I have been neglectful of mentioning:

Tuesday: L'OR and the Loss of Reason
Last Friday: The insordescence of Abp. Milingo demands response
Last Tuesday: Three points on the recent SSPX ordinations

And in case folks are wondering, he never solicits links. :)

Video: My appearance at "Word to Life" on The Catholic Channel

2009-07-01T11:00:00.002-04:00

Last Friday I did a segment on "Faith and New Media" for Fr. Aquinas Guilbeau OP's "Word to Life" program on Sirius XM Radio's The Catholic Channel (Sirius 159 and XM 117), live from the Sirius' studios in New York City.

Later, I found out that Sirius has a camera in their studio, which is cool because that means you can listen to the audio and see me "in action" (relatively speaking, of course - radio isn't exactly a full-contact sport!).

This from the St. Vincent Ferrer parish blog (Fr. Aquinas is one connected friar):

My appearance begins around the 25:00 minute mark.

While I was in New York City, Fr. Aquinas gave me a tour of Saint Vincent Church on the upper east side. I'll be writing about my impressions of this beautiful, vibrant parish later in the week - so stay tuned!

Pic/Video: Papist Annie from OZ with WYD backdrop

2009-07-01T10:00:00.001-04:00

Another excellent submission of AmP gear in action!

Anne of the Under Her Starry Mantle blog explains:

Hi Thomas, We finally got to Sydney as planned, my gregorian chant choir, Schola Cantorum was singing down there.

The photo has the Sydney Habour Bridge on one side, and if you look very carefully, on the other side of my head, you can just see the Sydney Opera House. This photo was taken from Sydney's Taronga Park Zoo. The Habour was where the Holy Father went across on the boat last year.

We had been down there last year for WYD with our six children. The Holy Father passed us only a metre away on the Monday morning he flew out.

I'm wearing my 'organic cotton' AmP t-shirt 'cause I'm very alternative with health things, great to see the offer for organic material was there!

God Bless, Anne.

Anne also included a very important message:

Haha! Well done. AmP Apparel also makes excellent Christmas presents for the kids. ;-)

See other examples of American Papists wearing AmP gear around the world right here.

Video/Story: U2's Bono admits new song inspired by Virgin Mary

2009-07-01T09:00:00.002-04:00

Tim Drake reports at NCRegister.com:

In a recent Rolling Stone magazine interview with Brian Hiatt, U2’s Bono says that the song “Magnificent” is inspired by the Blessed Virgin Mary.

“All music for me is worship of one kind or another,” says Bono.

The song appears on the band’s new album, “No Line on the Horizon.”

“Magnificent was inspired by the Magnificat, a passage from the Gospel of Luke in the voice of the Virgin Mary that was previously set to music by Bach,” says Bono. “There’s this theme running through the album of surrender and devotion and all the things I find really difficult.”

Here is the music video:

Here is where you can buy the Magnificent track ($1.00) or full CD ($9) on Amazon.

Vote for AmP by 6PM EST!

2009-06-30T14:45:00.002-04:00

thanks!

Papist Picture of the Day - 6/30/09

2009-06-30T13:00:00.001-04:00

"Bless me father, for I have purchased IKEA and shrubberies."

[source: Reuters]

Found: The Bones of St. Paul!

2009-06-30T12:00:00.004-04:00

Again, a story that slipped through my fingers.

Happily, St. Paul did not manage to permanently slip through the fingers of the Church (it seems):

Pope Benedict XVI said last night that bone fragments found inside the tomb of St Paul in Rome had been carbon dated for the first time, "confirming the unanimous and uncontested tradition that they are the mortal remains of the Apostle Paul".

He said that archaeologists had inserted a probe into the white marble sarcophagus under the Basilica of St Paul's Outside the Walls which has been revered for centuries as the tomb of St Paul.

The pontiff said: "Small fragments of bone were carbon dated by experts who knew nothing about their provenance and results showed they were from someone who lived between the 1st and 2nd century. This seems to confirm the unanimous and uncontested tradition that these are the mortal remains of Paul the Apostle."

The Pope, who said the discovery "fills our souls with great emotion", made the unexpected announcement during Vespers at St Paul's Basilica last night, marking the end of the Pauline year held in honour of the apostle. He said that as well as bone fragments, archaeologists had found grains of red incense, a piece of purple linen with gold sequins and a blue fabric with linen filaments in the tomb. (UK Times)

St. Paul: always full of surprises!

Can we say "pilgrimage site"?

Related: New Discoveries. Why St. Paul Was Given a Philosopher's Face by Sandro Magister:

"The oldest depiction of the apostle has been found just a short distance from his tomb, which is also the object of new investigations. The Church wanted to represent him as the Christian Plato. A daring decision. And still extremely relevant, even today"

In new plan, White House faces choice between Catholics or abortion groups

2009-06-30T11:00:00.001-04:00

Dan Gilgoff, with his dependable, informative coverage of things religious/political, notes that as the White House prepares to debut its abortion plan, "packing" is becoming a "major issue":

As the White House readies its plan for finding "common ground" on reproductive health issues and reducing the need for abortion, a major debate has emerged over how to package the plan's two major components: preventing unwanted pregnancies and reducing the need for abortion.

Many abortion rights advocates and some Democrats who want to dial down the culture wars want the White House to package the two parts of the plan together, as a single piece of legislation. The plan would seek to reduce unwanted pregnancies by funding comprehensive sex education and contraception and to reduce the need for abortion by bolstering federal support for pregnant women. Supporters of the approach say it would force senators and members of Congress on both sides of the abortion battle to compromise their traditional positions, creating true common ground that mirrors what President Obama has called for.

But more conservative religious groups working with the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships say they would be forced to oppose such a plan—even though they support the abortion reduction part—because they oppose federal dollars for contraception and comprehensive sex education. This camp, which includes such formidable organizations as the U.S. Council of Catholic Bishops and the Southern Baptist Convention, is pressuring the White House to decouple the two parts of the plan into separate bills. One bill would focus entirely on preventing unwanted pregnancy, while the other would focus on supporting pregnant women.

The White House declined a request for comment. Advocates for both plans say the administration has offered no hint about how it will come down on the matter. But with the White House expected to announce its plan on abortion and related issues this summer, advocates on both sides are strenuously lobbying for the plan, arguing that it offers the only true hope for common ground on very thorny issues. (Read full article here.)

The Obama team is silent about what it plans to do.

Bottom line:

For the White House, the decision about which tack to take is largely a question of whom it feels more comfortable alienating: religious groups like the Catholic bishops, which it has been trying hard to win over, or abortion rights groups, a key part of the Democratic base that it doesn't want to lose.

As I said in my extended look at Reproductive Health Reality Check's "common ground forum", the new pro-abortion tactic is "[not to] reduce abortion, [but] to reduce the "need" for abortion, often through recourse to contraception." And they will never rule out abortion. In fact, the RHRC's twitter feed yesterday promoted "ensuring universal access to family planning" (a euphemism for contraception and abortion) as common ground!

So what does this "new way" boil down to for us? Catholics giving in on contraception. The radical abortion agenda will not back down one step, so their "common ground" is a mask for us to compromise our principles.

Just look at the thoughts expressed in the ultra-liberal Daily Kos, which specifically targets Catholics:

On the subject of Reproductive Freedom, there can be no common ground between the militant anti-abortion religious right, including the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) and those of us who believe that people have the right to use any method of birth control they choice, up to and including safe, legal abortion.

While most of Catholics in this country and much of the rest of the world believe as I do, that girls, women and their sexual partners should have this right, the Roman Catholic hierarchy would rather women die of AIDS, and they and their children die of hunger, rather than a sexual partner use condoms or themselves use artificial methods of birth control or be able to attain a safe, legal abortion.

This sort of thinking is the same type that is held by the owners of Planned Parenthood, and the powerful pro-abortion interests in this country.

Secondly, it's a liberal orthodoxy that universal access to contraception (and honestly, pushing contraceptives on sexually active people, starting young) will reduce the need for abortions.

However, I've heard it argued that the actual data reveals that countries with expanded access to contraception actually have more need for abortions. I would tend to agree with this analysis, because who of us thinks that American youth *don't* have enough access to contraception?! Frankly, the people who don't use contraception for religious reasons are the same people who are far, far less likely to seek an abortion.

But it would help if I had the research at my finger tips. So if you know where it is online, please send me the link and I'll post it on AmP.

There is currently a lobbying battle waging between pro-abortion groups and the USCCB over which plan the Obama team chooses, as Gilgoff reports. We need to be active in supporting the USCCB and combating the tactics of the pro-abortion groups, who only offer a common ground that hurts Americans, born and unborn.

Photo: Five new American Archbishops

2009-06-30T10:00:00.003-04:00

Sometimes it's simply impossible to keep up on all the news. One of the stories that slipped through my fingers this week was the donation by Pope Benedict of palliums to *five* new American archbishops yesterday. CNS has a report.

From Left: Archbishops Timothy Dolan of New York, Gregory Aymond of New Orleans, Robert Carlson of St Louis, George Lucas of Omaha, and Allen Vigneron of Detroit.

I wonder if five is a record for a single year?

Ph/t: Whispers, which also has extensive coverage

Photo credit: Joanna Molloy of the New York Daily News

Stunning: New technology allows you to "hold" your baby before birth

2009-06-30T09:00:00.001-04:00

This new technology deserves a great deal of attention. I think there is a tremendous opportunity here, as I will explain.

Most of us have seen the amazing 4D photos of unborn children (I've inserted one to the left).

Now a student at the Royal College in Britain has taken the next step of using these photographs to create an individualized, life-size model of the pictured unborn child.

LifeNews:

Stunning new technology is allowing parents to go beyond a 3D or 4D ultrasound to bond with their unborn child in ways never imaginable. A student at the Royal College of Art in Britain has created life-like models based on pictures of unborn children that are the exact shape and size of the baby in the womb.

Fetal models have long been a staple of county fairs and health education classes across the country, but one student has gone further.

Brazilian student Jorge Lopes is a PhD. student at the college and he has pioneered the use of converting data from ultrasounds and MRI scans to form life-size plastic models in a process called rapid prototyping.

"It’s amazing to see the faces of the mothers. They can see the full scale of their baby, really understand the size of it," Lopes told the London Daily Mail newspaper.

The results are breathtaking:

More pictures of the models in action here.

Technology like this has the potential of re-framing the abortion debate, because this technology does not create an abstract model - it shows, instead, that killing an unborn life is never killing a type of human being, it's killing a distinct, unique human being.

Can you imagine, for instance, if these sorts of models were available to women considering abortion?

The "other side" of the abortion debate can imagine it. And the prospect scares them:

"Brazilian inventor, Jorge Lopes, figured out a way to use 3-D printing technology to create models from 3-D ultrasound images. The purpose, initially, was for archeological digs. But dinosaur bones? How can you make a fortune from dinosaur bones? You don’t.

But you can make a fortune preying on pregnant women’s fears, hopes and dreams."

See what the author did? Typically, advocates of abortion want to claim that science and technology are on their side. But lo and behold, a technology emerges which brings to mind the true reality of unborn life, and - suddenly - technology is no long neutral to their cause, it is instead "preying" on pregnant women! What can be said about a movement that constantly tries to hide the reality of what happens in an abortion? Are they truly on the side of science, or reason?

Next, the pro-abortionist who has probably accused the pro-life movement of being too preachy gets ... well, really preachy when she doesn't like how things are going. She says (addressing the creator of the technology):

"...don’t set up pregnant women for yet another way to fail in pregnancy and impending motherhood. Surely it’s OK to look deeply into a perfectly formed pair of stark white eyes with no irises and feel nothing."

My question is, how can seeing the human dimensions of your baby make you "fail" in pregnancy and motherhood? Is it not the case that the above author is actually terrified that women, when they see a model of their child, might realize that the real "failed" pregnancy is one where she allows her child to die?

More heartbreaking still, the author's only defense for "feeling nothing" when she looks into the model's eyes ... is that she must ignore the human, beautiful eyes of the real child within the womb. The point of the model is to show what is hidden from our sight. And it's only a guilty conscience that turns away from the truth.

I hope pro-lifers figure out ways of getting these models into the hands of the women who need to see them most. The truth of the human person and human development is on our side, now let's use the tools of science for the right end - to better the plight of unborn children who need mothers to see them as God sees them.

Papist Picture of the Day - 6/29/09

2009-06-29T14:00:00.000-04:00

Swiss Guard Test #14: Not cracking a smile during the pope's comedy routine.

[source: AP Photo]

Report: Pope's social encyclical July 6 or 7, some key paragraphs revealed

2009-06-29T13:00:00.003-04:00

I've fallen a bit behind on this story, so it's time to catch up. Here's the latest I've found:

The upcoming social encyclical of Pope Benedict XVI "Caritas in veritate" - Charity in truth - will bear the date of the feast of Sts. Peter and Paul, June 29, but will likely become public on July 6 or 7, the Italian daily Corriere della Sera said on Saturday.

An article by Gian Guido Vecchi quotes what he claims are several original paragraphs of the Pope’s third encyclical. (CNA)

Especially of interest:

According to Vecchi, the encyclical will hardly be “good news to the liberals and bad news to the conservatives,” as claimed by some analysts who have not seen the text of the document.

“The Pope quotes Paul VI’s Populorum progressio, which in 1967 denounced the gap between rich and poor countries, but the encyclical also takes from Humanae vitae in criticizing abortion and contraception,” Vecchi writes.

The encyclical, in fact, is likely to say that “openness to life is at the core of every true development,” and regarding the ambiguous policies aimed at “reducing the need for abortion” by means of other social policies, the Pope warns that “if personal and social sensibility toward the welcoming of a new life is lost, even other forms of welcoming (life) useful to social life become fruitless.”

WoW.

Now to replace rumors with reality ... I'll see what more I can find out about the impending publication.

update: Pope Benedict announced today that he has in fact signed "Caritas in Veritas." It's only a matter of time now until we have the full text.

John Allen has published a preview of what he believes will be in the encyclical. Seems accurate to me.

Cardinal O'Malley forces Caritas to make the right call

2009-06-29T12:00:00.003-04:00

The news broke last week, but I was traveling at the time. It appears to be good news.

Michael Paulson of the Boston Globe reports:

Caritas Christi Health Care, the financially challenged Catholic hospital system founded by the Archdiocese of Boston, is abruptly ending its joint venture with a Missouri-based health insurer at the insistence of Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley, who has decided that the relationship represented too much of an entanglement between Catholic hospitals and abortion providers.

The dramatic development, just days before the joint venture was scheduled to start providing care to low-income residents as part of the state's efforts to establish near universal health coverage here, is a vindication of sorts for a variety of very conservative Catholic critics of the cardinal, who have been arguing angrily and loudly that it would be "evil" for Caritas to partner with a health provider that covers abortion services.

The development is also a setback for Caritas, because it represents the undoing of one of the most significant steps its new chief executive, Dr. Ralph de la Torre, had announced as part of his efforts to turn around the hospital system's finances. It was not immediately clear last night what the financial impact of the change is on Caritas, but the decision is a stark and public reminder from O'Malley to de la Torre and the general public that moral concerns will trump monetary concerns at the Catholic hospitals.

I don't quite agree with the tone of the above treatment. I am somewhat aware of the criticisms Cardinal O'Malley has been receiving during this process, but just because some people have been too vigorous in their approach does not mean that the fundamental motivation of others is not a good one. It's in fact a Catholic one: we won't allow our hospitals to become accessories to abortions. Period.

AmP has been following the Caritas Christi situation for some time. First on March 12: "What is Caritas Christi up to?" and "An update on Caritas-Centene". Then on May 26: "Will the Boston Archdiocese really allow abortion referrals?" And finally on June 9: "Boston Archdiocese-affiliate health-care to offer abortion coverage" (when it looked like the deal would go through). On June 11th there was a report that Caritas was trying to work out a deal that would address the stated concerns about abortion referrals. Phil Lawler also wrote an in-depth history of the situation which is very helpful if you want more details.

At this point, I think two things are necessary: First, support of Cardinal O'Malley, who I believe is trying his best to do the right thing in a difficult situation. Second, vigilance about the details of the new plan, many of which are given in Paulson's full article treatment in the Boston Globe. There is some concern that Catholic involvement with abortions will still find its way in to the new operating procedures. The case of Caritas Christi is, sadly, the first instance of what is sure to become a more widespread problem as the health care industry reorganizes, often times collapsing Catholic and secular hospitals in with one another.

If anyone has incisive analysis of the current state of affairs, as well as action items and ideas for how the Catholic community can assist in working out an acceptable solution, I'll be happy to take a look and perhaps present them on AmP.

L'Osservatore Romano issues fawning tribute to Michael Jackson?

2009-06-29T11:00:00.001-04:00

What the heck is going on with L'Osservatore Romano these days? Who is commissioning these embarrassing articles, and who is allowing them to go to print?!

Zenit reports on the latest debacle:

Michael Jackson will never die "in the imagination of [his] fans," the Vatican's semi-official newspaper said after news spread of the pop star's death.

Marcello Filotei wrote this Friday in L'Osservatore Romano, comparing the death of the 50-year-old "King of Pop" to that of Elvis Presley.

Jackson died Friday of cardiac arrest at a Los Angelus hospital.

Noting how Jackson was a "child prodigy" with an "extraordinary soul voice," Filotei acknowledged the pop star's many successes, such as his megahit 1982 album "Thriller," "known even by those unfamiliar with this genre of music." The album continues to rank as the best-selling album of all time.

The writer acknowledged elements of the singer's life that drew wide criticism, such as his many plastic surgeries that changed his appearance radically, his increasingly pale complexion, and the allegations of pedophilia in 1993 and 2005. Jackson settled out of court in 1993, and was found not guilty of all charges in 2005.

"But no accusation, however serious or shameful, is enough to tarnish his myth among his millions of fans throughout the entire world," wrote Filotei.

Imagine how strange it would be to see such an editorial in your parish newspaper. Well, the above piece is appearing in the "parish newspaper" of the universal Church. That last line of Filotei's, in particular, sends the wrong message by falling into the current hysterical, cult-of-personality ethos that Jackson's death has inspired among many.

Jackson, it should be noted, from all outside accounts, lived a tortured existence and the circumstances of his death should prompt an outpouring of fervent prayers for his soul, not these gushing, hollywood-esque bon mots about how his "myth" will survive "serious and shameful" accusations. All the artistic success in the world, we must realize, is a basket of straw if your personal life was a spiritual, human wreck.

I really dig Michael Jackson's music, but as a Catholic, I don't have to buy into the myth that great art makes a great man. Michael Jackson's best chance to "never die" is the mercy of Christ, not his best-selling record.

Photo: "Rome catacomb reveals 'oldest' image of St Paul"

2009-06-29T10:00:00.003-04:00

And just in time for the feast of Sts. Peter and Paul:

Vatican archaeologists using laser technology have discovered what they believe is the oldest image in existence of St Paul the Apostle, dating from the late 4th century, on the walls of catacomb beneath Rome.

Vatican newspaper Osservatore Romano, revealing the find on Sunday, published a picture of a frescoed image of the face of a man with a pointed black beard on a red background, inside a bright yellow halo. The high forehead is furrowed.

Experts of the Ponitifical Commission for Sacred Archaeology made the discovery on June 19 in the Catacomb of Santa Tecla in Rome and describe it as the "oldest icon in history dedicated to the cult of the Apostle," according to the Vatican newspaper. (Reuters)

And the UK Times gives us the actual image:

The Catacomb of Santa Tecla in Rome is actually near the Basilica Church of "Paul Outside the Walls."

YouTube: Catholic iPhone Apps

2009-06-29T09:00:00.001-04:00

An amusing info-parody of Apple's advertisements for the iPhone:

Via Paul (and son) at SQPN (<-- visit this site!).