Now What's Going On In Madison

OK OK, the individual ego does not exist for about a nano second but a person can stay enlightened for about a good ten minutes.

At first I wasn't going to post another Bishop Morlino story, and this particular story has more to do with his Vicar for Clergy than it actually does Morlino.  Granted it was passed on under Morlino's signature, but still it just seemed to be more of the same oh same oh.  And then I read the linked material from NCR's report and just couldn't stop myself from writing.  Here is an excerpt of the NCR article by Joshua McElwee:

Wisconsin bishop bans materials, speakers from interfaith center

By Johsua McElwee - National Catholic Reporter -  12/11/2012
Madison, Wis., Bishop Robert Morlino has forbidden his diocese's parishes and schools from using materials /from an area interfaith spirituality center and banned the center's staff members, including two Catholic /sisters, from speaking at all diocesan events, according to a letter from the diocesan vicar general.

The blanket ban, first reported Tuesday by the Wisconsin State Journal, concerns Wisdom's Well Interfaith Spirituality Center, which provides workshops and overnight retreats for people seeking spiritual direction.
Msgr. James Bartylla, Madison's vicar general, states in a Nov. 27 letter to the diocese's priests that even the center's advertisements for centering prayer are no longer to be distributed on parish property.

"Centering Prayer," Bartylla writes, "is a type of contemplative prayer, yet contemplative prayer is a charism usually only given to those advanced in the spiritual life, and in the absence of sound spiritual direction accompanied by orthodox doctrine, attempting contemplative prayer can be counterproductive and even seriously harmful."

The letter, signed by Bartylla on Morlino's behalf, says the diocese's concern with the center is "evidenced mainly from its website" and is centered on fears that the center and its members "may espouse certain views flowing from New Ageism."  The rest of the article can be read here.

*******************************************

 I detect gnosticism coming from the chancery.  How else to understand this sentence:
contemplative prayer is a charism usually only given to those advanced in the spiritual life,  or this part of the same sentence:
attempting contemplative prayer can be counterproductive and even seriously harmful."  Both of these sentiments most certainly imply there are levels of prayer for initiates and that spiritual gurus are needed to proceed, otherwise comtemplative prayer could be seriously harmful. I thought this levels and initiates kind of thinking was associated with gnosticism.  The Church decided real early on that there were no hidden teachings of Jesus reserved for the more advanced.  Maybe Morlino found some, or maybe he's afraid New Agers found some, or maybe he's just losing it.

I do remember watching an EWTN program where one of their collared talking heads started spouting that Centering prayer or other contemplative prayer could open one up to attack by demons.  That was the last EWTN show I ever watched.  I found that kind of suggestion utterly abusive and more than likely to cause great harm to naive suggestible pious Catholics.  The placebo effect can work both for and against people and it can work much stronger when the suggestions are coming from ritual authority figures like EWTN priests.

Centering prayer has been a part of the Christian spiritual tool box for about fifty years and I don't know that I've ever read it harming anyone.  I have read oodles about how it's helped millions of people.  I have read the occasional orthodox cleric such as Msgr Bartylla imply it can harm people--of course, always without any proof.  But then if you actually take the time to read the material on the Diocesan website it's pretty apparent the good monsignor more or less compared the Vatican's document on New Ageism with the website material of the Wisdom's Well Center and hi lighted every place he may have found 'New Age' talking points.  I was shocked, utterly shocked, those words included 'quantum physics'.  Oh my God, I better stop reading any quantum physics, and Thomas Merton and Richard Rohr and Thomas Keating and and almost every other thing on my bookshelves.  It might be easier just to self excommunicate.  Does anyone know the orthodox ritual for that?


 

Pope Benedict's Idea of 'Sensus Fidelium' Includes Total Obedience To The Teaching Magisterium

Truly, two inches of bullet proof glass is more effective than relying on Faith.  Just like defining the 'sensus fidelium' as strictly the product of following the teaching magisterium is more effective for absolute theological monarchies than relying on some stupid poll.

Interesting bit of synchronicity given yesterdays post on Pope Benedict's belief in protecting the simple laity from the power of intellectuals.  Now he's using the Holy Spirit to protect the teaching authority from the opinions of the laity and other intellectuals. The following excerpt is from a Catholic News Service report on Pope Benedict's talk to the International Theological Commission.  In it he states that Catholic beliefs are not up to popular vote, and that the 'sensus fidelium' only exists in the sense that it is the voice of practicing Catholics who adhere to all the teachings of the magisterium,  and finally the Holy Spirit 'supernaturally' confirms all of this thus the Magisterium can never be wrong.

Catholic beliefs are not open to popular vote, pope says

Cindy Wooden - Catholic News Service - 12/7/2012
VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- When the Catholic Church affirms the importance of how all the faithful understand matters of faith and morals, it is not saying Catholic beliefs are open to a popular vote, Pope Benedict XVI said.

An authentic "sensus fidei," which literally means "sense of faith," can come only when Catholics actively participate in the life of the church and follow the teaching of the pope and bishops, he said Dec. 7 during a meeting with members of the International Theological Commission.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church quotes the Second Vatican Council's teaching that "the whole body of the faithful ... cannot err in matters of belief. This characteristic is shown in the supernatural appreciation of faith ('sensus fidei') on the part of the whole people, when, 'from the bishops to the last of the faithful,' they manifest a universal consent in matters of faith and morals." (If Pope Benedict really believed this he would have to drop his opposition to birth control and gay marriage, but of course, he's already qualified 'the faithful' by defining the faithful as only those practicing Catholics who are in conformity with the teaching magisterium.

Pope Benedict praised the theological commission members for including a discussion of the "sensus fidei" in "Theology Today: Perspectives, Principles and Criteria," a document they released in March and which affirms the primacy of bishops over theologians as interpreters of church teaching.

"Today it is particularly important to clarify the criteria which make it possible to distinguish the authentic 'sensus fidelium' from its counterfeits," the pope said. "In reality, it is not some kind of ecclesial public opinion, and it is unthinkable to use it to contest the teaching of the magisterium because the 'sensus fidei' cannot develop authentically in a believer except to the extent in which he or she fully participates in the life of the church, and this requires a responsible adherence to the magisterium." (If this is true, there is utterly no reason to even have the concept 'sensus fidelium.)
 
The "sensus fidei" is a kind of "supernatural instinct" that helps Catholics recognize what does and does not belong to the faith of the church, he said, and it is a sign that "the Holy Spirit does not cease to speak to the churches and lead them to the whole truth." (Is Pope Benedict actually saying the Holy Spirit exists to confirm the teachings of the bishops?)


**********************************************

I am really getting tired of self reflective circular reasoning that purports to make the teaching magisterium infallible by reason of it's very existence and the fact it tells us so.  Only the truly simple would buy this kind of reasoning, especially given the long history of the magisterium and it's many mistakes.  So much for the notion of sensus fidelium.  It no longer has any useful meaning what so ever at all.  I am seriously beginning to wonder if Benedict isn't beginning to show the signs of his age.

 

Bishop Olmstead To Replace Bishop Tobin In Rome

Bishop Olmstead on EWTN radio with you know who looking larger than life and over his shoulder.  Look out LCWR for Bishop Olmstead now has the power to protect the 'simple' nuns from you intellectuals.

The orthodox hurricane continues to swirl.  It's now taken Phoenix's Olmstead and whirled him right to Rome where he will replace Archbishop Tobin as Secretary of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life.  This move removes the LCWR's best friend and replaces him with another ladder climbing Grand Inquisitor. The following is the first paragraph of Vatican Insider's coverage of this impending move.

The Bishop of Phoenix, Olmsted, will soon be officially announced as the new Secretary of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life

marco tosatti - rome - Vaticn Insider - 12/7/12 The official announcement of the appointment of the Bishop of Phoenix (Arizona) Thomas J. Olmsted, as Secretary of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life is expected any day now. Olmsted should replace fellow American, Tobin, who occupied this delicate position for a very short period. Tobin heads the Archdiocese of Indianapolis. Olmsted’s approach in the Congregation is expected to be far closer to the sensibilities of American bishops with regard to issue of the LCWR (Leadership Conference of Women Religious)’s rebellious stance towards Catholic bishops and the Holy See. The number of nuns in the United States dropped by over two thousand members in just one year, from 57,113 to 55,045..........

*****************************************

The Vatican is surely on a roll.  If LCWR congregations lost 2000 members in one year, they will undoubtedly lose more after this announcement. Perhaps Pope Benedict's first tweet will finally acknowledge the Vatican is conducting a purge of historic proportions. A purge which is aimed squarely at the progressive 'feminist' wing of the Church.  Over on her blog Iglesia Descalza, Rebel Girl has listed the priests who have been punished by the Vatican in 2012.  Not surprising most of them have been censured for public statements of some sort in favor of women's ordination or gay civil marriage.  A number of these men have been censured in the last month.  The same month in which Pope Benedict issued a motu proprio demanding adherence to Catholic identity markers take place of prominence in Catholic social outreach ministries.  

The move to replace Tobin with Olmstead is reminiscent of the appointment of Cordileone as Archbishop of San Francisco. It's a way of placing favored orthodox lions in perceived wolves dens.  In reality these kinds of appointments come across as 'in your face' statements of unilateral power and hence very juvenile.  I've maintained for a long time that Pope Benedict's real desire is to actually create a leaner and meaner church and that as the end of this year approached we would start to see one decision after another that was designed to create this kind of Church.  The consequences of these moves will be a leaner and much meaner Church, but I'm not sure that is the motivation behind these moves.

Back in 2009, I wrote a piece in which I used this quote from Italian marxist Antonio Gramsci.  I'm not sure of the year in which Gramsci wrote this, but since he died in 1937, he didn't write it in response to today's Church.  In a sense then it is prophetic.

 "The strength of religions, and of the Catholic Church in particular, has lain, and still lies, in the fact that they feel very strongly the need for the doctrinal unity of the whole mass of the faithful and strive to ensure that the higher intellectual stratum does not get separated from the lower. The Roman church has always been the most vigorous in the struggle to prevent the “official” formation of two religions, one for the “intellectuals” and the other for the “simple souls” … That the Church has to face up to a problem of the “simple” means precisely that there has been a split in the community of the faithful. This split cannot be healed by raising the simple to the level of the intellectuals (the Church does not even envisage such a task, which is both ideologically and economically beyond its present capacities), but only by imposing an iron discipline on the intellectuals so that they do not exceed certain limits of differentiation and so render the split catastrophic and irreparable." 

What I find most interesting is that in his defense of silencing Fr Hans Kung, Cardinal Ratzinger used just this rationale when he said the task of a bishop is to protect the simple faithful from the intellectuals.  I truly believe this has been Pope Benedict's motivation all along, not to motivate the 'simple' to a more mature faith, but to protect them from such a move. There are all kinds of other reasons for the Vatican to engage in such a strategy.  The 'simple orthodox believer' is motivated from obedience, not maturing in Christian notions of love.  For them one matures in love, or demonstrates love, through obedience.  Obedience, as the cardinal virtue, greases the wheels of patriarchal authoritarian structures.  It is balm for the Vatican soul.  That it also leads to gross violations of human dignity, as exhibited in Catholic countries in World War II, is irrelevant. That the pursuit of perfect obedience is in essence utterly self serving and self protecting, goes unmentioned. That it is designed to promote the status quo is unacknowledged except in official acts which silence voices of forward movement.  

It is no wonder that the orthodox Vatican part Roman Catholic Church has become fixated on fighting women's ordination and gay marriage.  Women's ordination threatens the exclusively male status quo and forces a different view of women as equal in the spiritual realm, and accepting gay marriage means elevating notions of relational love over obedience and mechanistic biological notions of gender complementarity.  Both of these issues directly threaten traditional notions of obedience to male authority, but more than that, they threaten the notion of male authority as the complimentary piece giving order to the otherwise chaotic feminine spirit of creation.  For Catholic culture to move forward on either of these issues threatens chaos, especially for the 'simple' believer, many of which seem to reside with in the Vatican's walls.

NCR Endorses Women's Ordination. Excommunications To Follow

England's progressive Catholics have announced their solidarity with the women's ordination movement with advertising on a bus.  How appropriate.

The National Catholic Reporter editorial board has just published an editorial standing with Roy Bourgeios on the issue of women's ordination.  The following is the full editorial.  This is a very gutsy move by the NCR and given the current Catholic identity hysteria, it wouldn't surprise me if the whole editorial board was excommunicated.  Can we get more juvenile?  We will soon find out.

 

Editorial: Ordination of women would correct an injustice

Editorial Staff - National Catholic Reporter - 12/3/2012
The call to the priesthood is a gift from God. It is rooted in baptism and is called forth and affirmed by the community because it is authentic and evident in the person as a charism. Catholic women who have discerned a call to the priesthood and have had that call affirmed by the community should be ordained in the Roman Catholic church. Barring women from ordination to the priesthood is an injustice that cannot be allowed to stand.

The most egregious statement in the Nov. 19 press release announcing Roy Bourgeois' "excommunication, dismissal and laicization" is the assertion that Bourgeois' "disobedience" and "campaign against the teachings of the Catholic church" was "ignoring the sensitivities of the faithful." Nothing could be further from the truth. Bourgeois, attuned by a lifetime of listening to the marginalized, has heard the voice of the faithful and he has responded to that voice.

Bourgeois brings this issue to the real heart of the matter. He has said that no one can say who God can and cannot call to the priesthood, and to say that anatomy is somehow a barrier to God's ability to call one of God's own children forward places absurd limits on God's power. The majority of the faithful believe this.

Let's review the history of Rome's response to the call of the faithful to ordain women:

In April 1976 the Pontifical Biblical Commission concluded unanimously: "It does not seem that the New Testament by itself alone will permit us to settle in a clear way and once and for all the problem of the possible accession of women to the presbyterate." In further deliberation, the commission voted 12-5 in favor of the view that Scripture alone does not exclude the ordination of women, and 12-5 in favor of the view that the church could ordain women to the priesthood without going against Christ's original intentions.

In Inter Insigniores (dated Oct. 15, 1976, but released the following January), the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith said: "The Church, in fidelity to the example of the Lord, does not consider herself authorized to admit women to priestly ordination." That declaration, published with the approval of Pope Paul VI, was a relatively modest "does not consider herself authorized."

Pope John Paul II upped the ante considerably in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis (May 22, 1994): "We declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church's faithful." John Paul had wanted to describe the ban as "irreformable," a much stronger stance than "definitively held." This met substantial resistance from high-ranking bishops who gathered at a special Vatican meeting in March 1995 to discuss the document, NCR reported at the time. Even then, bishops attuned to the pastoral needs of the church had won a concession to the possibility of changing the teaching.

But that tiny victory was fleeting.

In October 1995, the doctrinal congregation acted further, releasing a responsum ad propositum dubium concerning the nature of the teaching in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis: "This teaching requires definitive assent, since, founded on the written Word of God, and from the beginning constantly preserved and applied in the Tradition of the Church, it has been set forth infallibly by the ordinary and universal Magisterium." The ban on women's ordination belongs "to the deposit of the faith," the responsum said.

The aim of the responsum was to stop all discussion.

In a cover letter to the responsum, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, then head of the congregation, asked presidents of bishops' conferences to "do everything possible to ensure its distribution and favorable reception, taking particular care that, above all on the part of theologians, pastors of souls and religious, ambiguous and contrary positions will not again be proposed."

Despite the certainty with which Ordinatio Sacerdotalis and the responsum were issued they did not answer all the questions on the issue.

Many have pointed out that to say that the teaching is "founded on the written Word of God" completely ignored the 1976 findings of the Pontifical Biblical Commission.

Others have noted that the doctrinal congregation did not make a claim of papal infallibility -- it said what the pope taught in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis was that which "has been set forth infallibly by the ordinary and universal magisterium." This too, however, has been called into question because at the time there were many bishops around the world who had serious reservations about the teaching, though few voiced them in public.

Writing in The Tablet in December 1995, Jesuit Fr. Francis A. Sullivan, a theological authority on the magisterium, cited Canon 749, that no doctrine is understood to have been defined infallibly unless this fact is clearly established. "The question that remains in my mind is whether it is a clearly established fact that the bishops of the Catholic Church are as convinced by [the teaching] as Pope John Paul evidently is," Sullivan wrote.

The responsum caught nearly all bishops off-guard. Though dated October, it was not made public until Nov. 18. Archbishop William Keeler of Baltimore, then the outgoing president of the U.S. bishops' conference, received the document with no warning three hours after the bishops had adjourned their annual fall meeting. One bishop told NCR that he learned about the document from reading The New York Times. He said many bishops were deeply troubled by the statement. He, like other bishops, spoke anonymously.

The Vatican had already begun to stack the deck against questioning. As Jesuit Fr. Thomas Reese reported in his 1989 book, Archbishop: Inside the Power Structure of the American Catholic Church, under John Paul a potential episcopal candidate's view on the teaching against women's ordination had become a litmus test for whether a priest could be promoted to bishop.

Less than a year after Ordinatio Sacerdotalis was issued, Mercy Sr. Carmel McEnroy was removed from her tenured position teaching theology at St. Meinrad Seminary in Indiana for her public dissent from church teaching; she had signed an open letter to the pope calling for women's ordination. McEnroy very likely was the first victim of Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, but there have been many more, most recently Roy Bourgeois.

Blessed John Henry Newman said that there are three magisteria in the church: the bishops, the theologians and the people. On the issue of women's ordination, two of the three voices have been silenced, which is why the third voice must now make itself heard. We must speak up in every forum available to us: in parish council meetings, faith-sharing groups, diocesan convocations and academic seminars. We should write letters to our bishops, to the editors of our local papers and television news channels.

Our message is that we believe the sensus fidelium is that the exclusion of women from the priesthood has no strong basis in Scripture or any other compelling rationale; therefore, women should be ordained. We have heard the faithful assent to this in countless conversations in parish halls, lecture halls and family gatherings. It has been studied and prayed over individually and in groups. The brave witness of the Women's Ordination Conference, as one example, gives us assurance that the faithful have come to this conclusion after prayerful consideration and study -- yes, even study of Ordinatio Sacerdotalis.

NCR joins its voice with Roy Bourgeois and calls for the Catholic church to correct this unjust teaching.

*******************************************

Kudos to the National Catholic Reporter.  They have taken a stand, raised their voices, and begun to take the lead in what may be the formation of something entirely different in American Catholicism.  I hope all Catholics who truly care about the future of this Church in the west, join in this particular New Evangelization.  I'm also pretty sure the letter from their bishop is on it's way asking them to take the name 'Catholic' off their mast head.   What ever will John Allen and Michael Sean Winters do?  Decisions of conscience will be the name of the game.  This really is a huge gamble for the NCR, but one they made with a great deal of integrity.

Yesterday I was going to post an article entitle "Do you know where you are going? God."  When I'm taking clients to the main center we have to pass this billboard every day and usually know one knows where they are going.  Yesterday I realized that included me.  I was so frustrated with Benedict's latest motu proprio about Catholic identity and Catholic organizations.  I couldn't' really write anything so I played 125 consecutive games of Free Cell trying to find some inspiration.  I guess I had to wait for today.  In reality I have been waiting a very long time for one of our so called leading progressive publications to take a meaningful stand on the spiraling downward direction of the Church in the West and especially in the US. Finally the NCR has.

I hope though, that it doesn't just stop with women's ordination, because the issues facing the Church are much more than that.  The Vatican is desperately hanging onto an out dated mode of clerical priesthood that can not meet the demands of the laity, and this is going to get even worse in the developing world.  There are hundreds of millions of Catholics globally who can not access the Eucharist or the other sacraments because there are no priests. The Vatican's idea of establishing lay apostolates and a trumped up diaconate for women does not solve this problem.  The only thing that does solve the problem is to change the disciplines surrounding the priesthood and revamp our entire understanding of what the expectations are for our sacramental leadership. Calling for women priests is a start, but it isn't the finish.  It is the direction I think God is calling us to go.  So, do I know where I am going?  Yes, I'm going to stay and continue to advocate for meaningful change.  Catholicism without sacramental and Eucharistic access is just another form of protestantism.

 

Benedict Releases A New Motu Proprio And Catholic Identity Supercedes Christian Charity

   

Caritas will be having to change this logo.  It will have to say Caritas is Catholic.

John Allen posted an NCR article about the just released motu proprio from Benedict XVI on Catholic identity in charitable efforts.  This papal letter was written at the behest of the Vatican watchdog for Caritas Internationales, the dicastery known as Cor Unum. Like the LCWR, the Vatican came down on Caritas Internationales for laxness on it's Catholic identity.  This letter, if applied to Catholic efforts in the US, could spell the destruction of some of our bigger charitable efforts that rely on government grants.

New rules aim to beef up Catholic identity of church charities

 Rome - John Allen - National Catholic Reporter - 12/1/2012

A mounting campaign by church authorities to foster a stronger sense of traditional Catholic identity reached deeper into the realm of Catholic charitable activity today, with new papal rules directing bishops to exercise greater vigilance and control.

Among other things, the new rules appear to tighten the scope for Catholic charities to collaborate with groups with whom they may share specific interests, but which also take positions that conflict with Catholic teaching.  In effect, the rules appear to be a response to perceptions voiced over the years that some church-run charities are more similar to secular NGOs and humanitarian groups than to distinctly Catholic operations.  (Catholic identity in this context now supercedes Christian identity.  It's not enough to practice Christian charity, it must be Catholic charity.)

Specifically, Pope Benedict XVI’s legal document, technically known as a motu proprio, stipulates that:

1) A charitable group may call itself “Catholic” only with the written consent of church authorities. If a particular outfit is deemed to be no longer “in conformity with the church’s teaching,” the bishop should make that known and take steps to prevent it from using the title “Catholic.” (This states a bishop's first duty is to the institution itself,  and not to the mission Jesus commanded of His disciples.)

2) Personnel must “share, or at least respect” the Catholic identity of church-affiliated charitable organizations, and must also “give an example of Christian life” beyond their professional competence.
A Catholic charity may not take money “from groups or institutions that pursue ends contrary to the church’s teaching.” (I suspect this really means employees must be Catholic enough not to openly challenge the teachings on the all important pelvic issues.  Nor should they demand birth control in their health insurance.)

3) To avoid leading people “into error or misunderstanding,” bishops are to ensure that parishes and dioceses don’t publicize initiatives “which, while presenting themselves as charitable, propose choices or methods at odds with the church’s teaching.” (Apparently Catholics are considered too freaking stupid or too spiritually immature to handle any conflicts between charitable efforts and Church teaching.)

The title of the new papal edict is De Caritate ministranda, “On the service of charity,” and it was published today on the Vatican web site. Benedict wrote that he issued the document upon the recommendation of Cardinal Robert Sarah of Guinea, who heads the Pontifical Council Cor Unum, the Vatican’s main oversight agency for charitable activities.

The new regulations come roughly a year after the Vatican moved to tighten its control over the leading global federation for Catholic charities, the Rome-based Caritas Internationalis. The organization’s secretary general at the time, Zimbabwe-born laywoman Lesley-Anne Knight, was denied Vatican permission to stand for a second term, and the organization’s statutes were revised to provide greater oversight by Vatican authorities, especially Cor Unum.

Among other things, the Vatican appeared to want Caritas, and Catholic charities generally, to have a more specifically “missionary” orientation, meaning promoting the faith alongside meeting basic humanitarian needs.
One veteran of the Catholic charities scene summed things up this way at the time in a background comment to NCR: “When it comes to charity work, there’s a continuum from secular humanism on one end to aggressive proselytism breeding ‘rice Christians’ on the other. Nobody’s saying Caritas ought to be at either extreme, but it’s clear the Vatican is pushing us further in the direction of promoting the church while we provide humanitarian and emergency assistance.”

In today’s document, Benedict XVI insisted that “The service of charity is a constitutive element of the church’s mission and an indispensable expression of her very being.” (Unfortunately sure looks to me like charitable efforts have now been reduced to an advertising campaign for Catholicism.  Why else this obsession with 'identity markers'.


*************************************************

I'm beginning to detect a definite campaign by Rome to make sure no one confuses social justice Catholicism with the 'real' Catholicism of strict obedience to Rome.  Hence Catholic identity has taken place of primacy over Christian mission.  I'm actually not sure if the whole idea isn't to stamp out Christian from Roman Catholic and to further the purposeful conflation of Church with God, pope with God, priest with Jesus, Holy Spirit locked up in Vatican City dragged out only when god the pope allows it.

In the hands of bishops like Phoenix's Olmstead, this letter is a license to wreak havoc amongst Catholic hospitals, charities, schools, and other efforts by making the bishop the sole dictatorial power over all things Catholic.  I can think of many other bishops who will wield this letter as a bludgeon to further their control in their dioceses and to shut down any alternative voice.

I wonder, given the actual wording of this letter, how many Catholic NGO's will be allowed to take any government grants, especially under this President, who has been vilified by our orthodox Catholic identity bishops as some form of the anti Christ.  If I were working for a Catholic NGO in the State of Wisconsin, I'd really be concerned about my job. Or I'd be seriously agitating for dropping the word Catholic from the name of the organization I worked for in order to keep my job and it's mission funded.  

For me, there is no question I would sacrifice "Catholic identity" for the sake of the mission.  The fact this letter is essentially forcing such a choice says reams about the current direction of Rome. Rome controls all the directions, all directions must come from Rome, and lead back to Rome. All Rome all the time, which makes me wonder why the emphasis isn't on ROMAN as the identity marker rather than Catholic.  It certainly isn't about Christian or Jesus or mission to the poor, or if it is, it's only a very distant second.

I suspect the real reason for all of this is precisely to make more 'rice Catholics' in the developing world to compete with 'rice Moslems'.  Sort of following in the footsteps of Hammas by using social justice missions to convert followers.  Which then makes this motu proprio a geo political tool most useful to bishops in the developing world but also very useful to reactionary bishops in the first world who never seem to get bored with reminding Western Catholics the Church is not a democracy and that pelvic issues are vastly more important than social justice issues.

And sadly, this movement to dis-empower the progressive social justice wing of the Church is only going to get more intense.

AB Chaput Endorses St Thomas More---But St Thomas Is A Humanist!

St Thomas More and his family by Hans Holbein.  One of the family monkeys is in the lower right hand corner next to Alice More.

One of the trends of the conservative church that has always amused me is the continual dragging forth of St Thomas More to bolster their point.  Off hand I can't think of too many Catholic right wing enterprises that don't feature Thomas More with regularity. Come to think of it,  the same kind of thing is happening with Cardinal Newman.  The truth about Thomas More is that he was not a conservative thinker.  They don't call him one of the fathers of humanism for nothing.  While he was also a staunch defender of Catholicism--he did preside over the burning of Lutheran heretics--he was far more complicated than that.  I would say he was sorely conflicted between his secular speculations and his religious training and couldn't find a reasonable way out of his entangled mind.  Which I suppose is why he is my favorite saint.  In the end he died for his faith, not necessarily for the Church.  He thought the Church was virtually overrun with ambitious clerics and outright corruption.

So while I don't find it surprising that AB Chaput waxes eloquently about Thomas More, I do find it somewhat amusing because based on what he wrote in Utopia, More would have been a democrat, if not an outright socialist.

Archbishop Chaput Writes on the Call To Martyrdom

By Archbishop Charles J. Chaput
Archbishop of Philadelphia
PHILADELPHIA, NOV. 23, 2012 (Zenit.org).- The Church has many good reasons why people should believe in God, believe in Jesus Christ and believe in the beauty and urgency of her own mission.  But she has only one irrefutable argument for the truth of what she teaches – the personal example of her saints.
Over this Thanksgiving weekend, or sometime during Advent, I have a homework assignment for you.  I want you to rent or buy or borrow a copy of the 1966 film about Sir Thomas More, A Man for All Seasons.  I want you to watch it with your family.  Here’s why.  More was one of the most distinguished scholars of his time, a brilliant lawyer, a gifted diplomat and a skilled political leader.  Jonathan Swift, the great Anglo-Irish writer, once described him as the “person of the greatest virtue this kingdom (of England) ever produced.”

Above all, Thomas More was a man of profound Catholic faith and practice.  He lived what he claimed to believe.  He had his priorities in right order.  He was a husband and a father first; a man who – in the words of Robert Bolt, the author of the original play and the 1966 film – “adored, and was adored, by his own large family.” (He was also one of the few men of his time who insisted his daughters receive the same classical education as his son. Many of his fellow scholars thought he was nuts to waste that kind of education on females.)

A Man for All Seasons won Oscars for both Best Picture and Best Actor, and it’s clearly one of the great stories ever brought to the screen.  But it captures only a small fraction of the real man. In his daily life, Thomas More loved to laugh.  He enjoyed life and every one of its gifts.   Erasmus, the great Dutch humanist scholar and a friend of More and his family, described More as a man of “amiable joyousness (and) simple dress … born and framed for friendship … easy of access to all,” uninterested in ceremony and riches, humble, indifferent to food,  unimpressed by opinions of the crowd, and never departing from common sense. (Erasmus also thought St Thomas had compromised his integrity by agreeing to serve in a corrupt monarchy.)

Despite the integrity of More’s character, and despite his faithful service, Henry VIII martyred him in 1535.  More refused to accept the Tudor king’s illicit marriage to Anne Boleyn, and he refused to repudiate his fidelity to the Holy See.  In 1935, the Church declared Thomas More a saint.  Today – half a millennium after he died and a continent away -- this one man’s faith still moves us in our own daily lives.  That’s the power of sainthood.  That’s the power of holiness. (Correction, St Thomas refused to disavow his belief in the religious primacy of the Pope.  In truth he thought the Holy See was a cesspool of corruption which compromised the spiritual mission of the Church.  Kind of like today.)

Here’s the lesson I want to leave you with this week.  We’re all called to martyrdom.  That’s what the word martyr means:  It’s the Greek word for “witness.”  We may or may not ever suffer personally for our love of Jesus Christ.  But we’re all called to be witnesses.

In proclaiming the Year of Faith, Benedict XVI wrote that:
“By faith, across the centuries, men and women of all ages, whose names are written in the Book of Life … have confessed the beauty of following the Lord Jesus wherever they were called to bear witness to the fact that they were Christian: in the family, in the workplace, in public life, in the exercise of the charisms and ministries to which they were called.”

The only thing that matters is to be a saint.  That’s what we need to be.  That’s what we need to become.  And if we can serve God through the witness of our lives by kindling that fire of holiness again in the heart of our local parishes and communities, then the Christ Child who comes to us at Christmas will make all things new – in our Church, in our families and in our nation.
May God grant us all a joy-filled and blessed Thanksgiving.

**********************************************

AB Chaput does have this right, Thomas More loved to laugh.  He even kept his own jester who is reported to have had no problem cutting More's ego down to size.  More's wife however, was not so enamored of their court jester.  One too many jokes about her portly proportions I guess.  But then the poor woman also had to put up with her husbands personal zoo.  While Chancellor of England, More's personal zoo was substantial and contained quite a number of exotic animals.  The monkeys were given the run of his house, as can be seen in the above Holbein painting of the family. Besides the court jester, More would also foster patients from London's infamous Bedlam, the beastly forerunner of mental hospitals. In short he seemed to have a penchant for taking in all kinds of strays and befriending all kinds of marginal people.  Personally I think his wife should be the saint.

To protect his own privacy, More also built his own study separate from the main Chelsea Manor, in which he did most of his writing.  It's shape was based on an octagon for esoteric reasons.  Presumably no monkees were allowed.  One could say he invented the first 'man cave' as he did spend a great deal of time in his study when he was at home,  His children and wife were not allowed in it's holy precincts but this might have been as much for security interests as anything else.

More's life is rarely placed in the context in which he actually lived.  These were momentous times and adjustments to an utterly new reality made belief in religious truths a form of personal security.  The man lived in a period of time in European history when all the rules were changing.  The New World with all it's other humans had been discovered during his teen years.  I don't know that contemporary Catholics can fathom how earth shaking this must have been.  Not only was the Earth round, but it held unknown races of people.  It would be as if we today were suddenly confronted with the existence of actual sentient alien life. On top of this, there was enormous corruption in the church which had precipitated major schisms and protests, of which both Erasmus and More were prolific in their own negative assessments of the institutional church, and like the heretics, they could get their writings read by many people because the printing press was beginning to be felt as the truly consciousness changing invention it was.  Reading and writing were no longer just the province of a minority of educated nobility and clerics.  The power of the intellect was being unleashed in anyone who chose to learn to read and write.  Many men were doing just that which would then spawn the Enlightenment.  It was the humanists like Thomas More who laid the seeds for that future.

But not all of More's writings were of the academic sort. Some of More's less known writings are his pamphlets in which he was essentially the Rush Limbaugh of Catholic apologetics.  I suppose they are less known because he wrote them under a pseudonym--supposedly at the behest of Henry VIII.  A number of these apologetic tracts were written in refutation of Martin Luther and William Tyndale who responded in kind. Luther was furious More was writing under a pseudonym while he Luther, was writing under his own name.  Having read a few of these back and forth pamphlets, I'm not sure any of the men should have been proud of their efforts.  Some of the language was truly spewed forth from a gutter and the personal attacks were vicious and completely juvenile.  They were actually far worse than most of today's internet exchanges, and certainly not the kind of thing that owners of Catholic law schools named after the mythical St Thomas More want known about the real St Thomas More.

It is questionable if Thomas More would have ever been made a saint if Henry VIII hadn't beheaded him.  There was no question of More recanting his position on Henry's marriage or the primacy of the papacy for Roman Catholicism. More became even more religiously conservative after the Lutheran schism.  More's Catholicism was his anchor in a world of change, some of which he embraced and initiated, and some of which he refused to even consider.  For all his open mindedness in some areas, he could be downright close minded in other areas.  He could correspond with off kilter mystics who spouted one form of heresy while at the same time he was executing Lutherans for spouting what he deemed actual heresy.  He could see to it that his daughters were well educated in classical Greek and Latin while he was persecuting Tyndale for translating the bible in to English from the original Greek sources. I suppose the difference lay in More's ability to control his daughter's education but lack of ability to control Tyndale, whose translation very cleverly used particular English words to undercut certain very important Church concepts, like the translation of the Greek word ecclesia as congregation rather than Church.  In any event, the two enemies met the same fate, execution. One is a saint and one is a heretic, at least in the eyes of the Church.

I have no doubt Thomas More is a saint, but not because he was martyred.  At the end of his life, while he was in prison having lost everything, he wrote his most profound works.  They were mystical treatises on his relationship with the Eucharist and with Jesus Christ.  Stripped bare, he was able to reconcile his intellect with his faith and find his personal truth.  He died true to his conscience.  He died a saint not just a martyr.

"Mr" Bourgeois No Longer Has To Worry About How He Dresses In Rome

.

Mr Roy Bourgeois may win this battle with the US Army, but he just lost one with the CDF

Today the Maryknollers announced the CDF had unilaterally dismissed Fr Roy Bourgeois from the Maryknoll community and his priestly vows.  It took four years, but it was inevitable. I never did understand how in the world Roy Bourgeous could keep his bonds sacred by lieing about his thoughts on this issue, but in the Vatican world priorities seem a little skewed.  Reminds me very much of the Lennon Cihak in Minnesota who was told he could be confirmed if he lied to his whole parish about his feelings on civil gay marriage. Lennon is in very good company now.  Being advised to lie to maintain or receive sacraments is not terribly sacred nor does it seem very Catholic, but lieing is becoming routine in the upper echelons so maybe it is some new form of Catholic truth.

MARYKNOLL, N.Y., Nov. 19, 2012 /Christian Newswire/ -- The Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, on October 4, 2012, canonically dismissed Roy Bourgeois from the Catholic Foreign Mission Society of America, also known as the Maryknoll Fathers and Brothers. The decision dispenses the Maryknoll priest from his sacred bonds.

As a priest during 2008, Mr. Bourgeois participated in the invalid ordination of a woman and a simulated Mass in Lexington, Kentucky. With patience, the Holy See and the Maryknoll Society have encouraged his reconciliation with the Catholic Church.

Instead, Mr. Bourgeois chose to campaign against the teachings of the Catholic Church in secular and non-Catholic venues. This was done without the permission of the local U.S. Catholic Bishops and while ignoring the sensitivities of the faithful across the country. Disobedience and preaching against the teaching of the Catholic Church about women's ordination led to his excommunication, dismissal and laicization.

Mr. Bourgeois freely chose his views and actions, and all the members of the Maryknoll Society are saddened at the failure of reconciliation. With this parting, the Maryknoll Society warmly thanks Roy Bourgeois for his service to mission and all members wish him well in his personal life. In the spirit of equity and charity, Maryknoll will assist Mr. Bourgeois with this transition.

****************************************

I don't understand how Maryknoll brass ever expected Roy Bourgeois to reconcile on Vatican terms.  That line about being 'saddened' seems a bit disingenous, but it is nice that they are willing to assist Roy with his transition.  Especially given the fact Roy did quite a bit to put Maryknoll in the lead in social justice advocacy.  I would imagine the charity they extend to Roy will come from numerous donations Roy generated for Maryknoll. 

There's been a lot of craziness today in the Catholic world.  Speaking of letters, I found the letter written by Lennon Nicah's ex pastor more unbelievable than the one from Cardinal Bertone on the clergy dress code.  In this letter Fr Gary DeMoines explains to his parish that all the press and other activity surrounding the non confirmation of Nicah and another student was all the Nicah's family fault--of course, of course, but then he goes on in this vain:

"Nevertheless, even if he had not withdrawn from the confirmation ceremony, I would have had no choice but to remove him from consideration given his rejection of marriage as we understand it. Rejection of the Church’s teaching on marriage is a very serious breach of faith. We believe that the teaching on marriage (that marriage is between one man and one woman for the purpose of creating new life), is a matter of divine revelation; it comes directly to us from God. Rejection of the teaching on marriage is, for example, similar to the rejection of the doctrine of the Blessed Trinity or the rejection of the doctrine of Christ as being both human and divine. Marriage, divinely received, is a central belief. Intending to celebrate the sacrament of Confirmation, while rejecting a central belief, is an absolute contradiction. One cannot embrace the faith of the Church in Confirmation while rejecting it at the same time.

Since when has anything having to do with marriage been elevated to the same status as Jesus's human/Divine nature or the doctrine of the Blessed Trinity?  I guess about the same time the advocacy by a priest for the ordination of women was placed in the same grave delict category as raping little children.  Except advocation for women's ordination, or just attending an ordination is sure to get you laicized, but not raping little children, even 200 deaf children as in the case of Fr Lawrence Murphy whose story is once again making headlines.  No, in Murphy's case, he only had to whine to Cardinal Ratzinger then the head of the same CDF that just booted Roy, and Murphy gets to be buried with full Catholic clerical honors--much to the joy of his family and over the objections of two of his bishops.  

Conservative or traditional Catholics have made comments to the effect that I am overly hateful towards Catholic leadership.  No, I'm just really angry and engaging in the same 'hate the sin, love the sinner' behavior that I was taught that traditionalists use towards gay folks. But honestly, the real problem I have with that critique is that in making it one has to be willfully blind to the skewed priorities of our current leadership.  You have to willingly stick your head in the sand-or lie to yourself- to avoid seeing there is a very dark force surrounding our leadership and it's not dissenting Catholics.  It's a leadership which can demand a young person  like Lennon Nicah to lie, to knowingly commit a sin, in order to receive a sacrament; that can place the teaching on marriage as equal to the Holy Trinity; that can make the sacraments, including Jesus in the Eucharist, hostage to agreement with a given bishop's politics;  that dares equate the ordination of women with the clerical raping of children; that blatantly interjects itself in secular politics seemingly never having gotten any lessons about this activity from it's traditional past, and that seems to care more about how it clothes it's self than it does whether it's children even have clothes.

I believe Roy Bourgeois was freed from the insanity he couldn't leave, not the Catholic Church freed from Roy and his heretical opinions.  May God bless him in his future endeavors.  One of those endeavors, the closing of the School of the Americas now known as WHINESEC, may actually happen and that would be the answer to a lot of Catholic prayers.

 
  

I Learn About The "Abito Piano" As Part Of My Catholic Education

This is an 'abito piano'.  It's just not the correct kind. It is properly Italian.

This is the correct kind.

This is the modern version as modeled by the CDF boss before he became The Boss and could model the less ostentatious pure white version.

The Vatican is really going retro with this lastest letter from Cardinal Bertone at the behest of Pope Benedict. Cassocks make the priest, and cassocks with capes are mandatory when the Pope is around.  I seriously don't know whether to laugh or cry.  The following is from chiesa.espressoonline.it.   It was first brought to my attention by NCR's article by Joshua McEwee.
 
VATICAN CITY, November 19, 2012 – The cassock obligatory for cardinals and bishops during office hours. Cassock or clerical dress for priests and monsignors. Specific habit for religious, always and in every season. And for ceremonies in the presence of the pope or during official meetings in the Roman curia: "abito piano," or cassock with cape, for priests, embroidered cassock for monsignors, and cassock with embroidered cape (called a "pellegrina") for bishops and cardinals.

This is the code of service reiterated recently in the Vatican in the wake of the guidelines issued by John Paul II in a September 8, 1982 letter to the cardinal vicar of Rome at the time, Ugo Poletti:

> "La cura dell'amata diocesi di Roma..."

In that letter, pope Karol Wojtyla addressed his vicar, "who most closely shares my cares and concerns in the governance of the diocese, [. . .] so that, in conjunction with the sacred congregations for the clergy, for religious and secular institutes, and for Catholic education, he may study opportune initiatives destined to foster the use of ecclesiastical and religious dress, issuing in this regard the necessary guidelines and taking care of their application."

The new memo, which bears the date of October 15, 2012 and was issued during the last synod of bishops, was signed by cardinal secretary of state Tarcisio Bertone, who wrote it, as it reads, "at venerable behest," meaning at the direction of Benedict XVI.

It sounds as a reminder of the "duty of exemplarity that is incumbent above all upon those who render service to the successor of Peter."

But not only that. The letter is intended to be an "explicit encouragement" for all of those – "including for the episcopates," it emphasizes – who visit Rome.

There is no explicit reference in the text to the women religious who work in the Vatican, but by analogy with the male religious, the rule should apply to them as well.

The guideline is therefore very clear. Those who have the opportunity to frequent the Vatican offices will be able to see to what extent it is respected.

*********************************************

No more schlepping around Rome in Anglican style dog collars and black suits that have no piping to indicate rank.  The clerical troops are being called to account for themselves as to their dress, but not yet to their off hours shenanigans.  Covering up the clerics does not cover up the cover ups.  Has the Vatican really sunk to this level of performance expectancy? All will be well if we just all get together and dress like we used to dress before we were exposed.  I somehow think this might all a little too Freudian for my tastes. 

A Nun On A Bus? No, A Jesus Follower On A Mission

Sister Simone Campbell and the infamous Nuns on the Bus bus.

I came across a fabulous talk given by Sr Simone Campbell to the Detroit group Elephants in the Living Room. In her talk she explains the mission of NETWORK as a lobbying group and the interest it drew from the USCCB during the Affordable Care Act debates, how that most like resulted in the attention shown by the Vatican in the Vatican's investigation of the LCWR and more specifically NETWORK itself.  As Simone says, the girls inadvertently wound up taking on the boys and the girls won and the boys were very sore losers.

She also explains in a very unique way how income distribution has warped towards the 1% in the US since 1979 and how that has effected so many issues in this country.  I was shocked to learn the only other global western type culture with a worse income distribution is Singapore.  But principally this is a talk about what motivates Sr Simone.  That motivation is radical acceptance of everyone, although as she admits, that's a difficult prospect with Eric Cantor and Mitch McConnell.  But it's not just radical acceptance, it's also the ability to keep the flame of faith burning and shining light on things hidden in dark shadows.  Radical acceptance does not mean being blind to having to fight the good fight.

Following this link will take readers to a transcript of her talk which is really informative and really funny.  It 's easy to see why she held her own with Stephen Colbert.  Simone Campbell is a true prophetic figure who doesn't take herself the least bit seriously, but takes her mission dead seriously.  She's what I call an Enlightened Catholic, in the pun sense of the title. It's worth the time it takes to read it.  There are some other excellent transcripts of speeches given by other speakers on the Elephants in the Living Room website , including one from Fr Charles Curran on dissent and authority.  Be sure to check those out if you have the time.

Catholic Religious Tyranny Takes A Mother's Life In Ireland

Irish Times photo by Brenda Fitzsimmons of protesters Wednesday night outside Ireland's Dail

 

 

The following is a very very sad story. It should be read by every woman of child bearing age in the US, because if Roman Catholic bishops and Evangelical Pro Life proponents ever get their theocratic way, this situation could and most like will happen in all our hospitals, and not just Catholic ones.

 

Savita Halappanavar was not Irish and was not Catholic, but like many Irish Catholic women she found Catholic hospital care neither hospitable nor caring.  Not when it comes to pregnant women.  For them the heart beat of a non viable fetus holds their lives hostage to the absolutism of Catholic abortion teaching.  The following is from the Irish Times.

Woman 'denied a termination' dies in hospital

 Kitty Holland and Paul Curren - Irish Times - 11/14/2012
Two investigations are under way into the death of a woman who was 17 weeks pregnant, at University Hospital Galway last month.
Savita Halappanavar (31), a dentist, presented with back pain at the hospital on October 21st, was found to be miscarrying, and died of septicaemia a week later.
Her husband, Praveen Halappanavar (34), an engineer at Boston Scientific in Galway, says she asked several times over a three-day period that the pregnancy be terminated. He says that, having been told she was miscarrying, and after one day in severe pain, Ms Halappanavar asked for a medical termination.
This was refused, he says, because the foetal heartbeat was still present and they were told, “this is a Catholic country”.
She spent a further 2½ days “in agony” until the foetal heartbeat stopped.

Intensive care

The dead foetus was removed and Savita was taken to the high dependency unit and then the intensive care unit, where she died of septicaemia on the 28th.
An autopsy carried out by Dr Grace Callagy two days later found she died of septicaemia “documented ante-mortem” and E.coli ESBL.

A hospital spokesman confirmed the Health Service Executive had begun an investigation while the hospital had also instigated an internal investigation. He said the hospital extended its sympathy to the family and friends of Ms Halappanavar but could not discuss the details of any individual case.
Speaking from Belgaum in the Karnataka region of southwest India, Mr Halappanavar said an internal examination was performed when she first presented.
“The doctor told us the cervix was fully dilated, amniotic fluid was leaking and unfortunately the baby wouldn’t survive.” The doctor, he says, said it should be over in a few hours. There followed three days, he says, of the foetal heartbeat being checked several times a day.
“Savita was really in agony. She was very upset, but she accepted she was losing the baby. When the consultant came on the ward rounds on Monday morning Savita asked if they could not save the baby could they induce to end the pregnancy. The consultant said, ‘As long as there is a foetal heartbeat we can’t do anything’.
“Again on Tuesday morning, the ward rounds and the same discussion. The consultant said it was the law, that this is a Catholic country. Savita [a Hindu] said: ‘I am neither Irish nor Catholic’ but they said there was nothing they could do.
“That evening she developed shakes and shivering and she was vomiting. She went to use the toilet and she collapsed. There were big alarms and a doctor took bloods and started her on antibiotics.
“The next morning I said she was so sick and asked again that they just end it, but they said they couldn’t.”

Critically ill

At lunchtime the foetal heart had stopped and Ms Halappanavar was brought to theatre to have the womb contents removed. “When she came out she was talking okay but she was very sick. That’s the last time I spoke to her.”
At 11 pm he got a call from the hospital. “They said they were shifting her to intensive care. Her heart and pulse were low, her temperature was high. She was sedated and critical but stable. She stayed stable on Friday but by 7pm on Saturday they said her heart, kidneys and liver weren’t functioning. She was critically ill. That night, we lost her.”
Mr Halappanavar took his wife’s body home on Thursday, November 1st, where she was cremated and laid to rest on November 3rd.
The hospital spokesman said that in general sudden hospital deaths were reported to the coroner. In the case of maternal deaths, a risk review of the case was carried out.
External experts were involved in this review and the family consulted on the terms of reference. They were also interviewed by the review team and given a copy of the report.

******************************************

As I write this there are major protests occurring in Ireland and elsewhere.  More are scheduled for the weekend. Irish legistlators who mandated the fetal heart beat rule, the very one used in American Catholic hositals, never thought a thing like this could happen.  Not in Catholic Ireland.  Well it did, and it can happen again, and it can happen in any Catholic hospital whose staff let their bishop make their medical decisions for them.

It is the very kind of situation that prompted Phoenix's St Joseph hospital to act on their own initiative and save the life of the mother when the fetus couldn't survive with or without the mother.  For saving a life a bishop excommunicated the director of the ethics board.  St Joseph's is no longer a Catholic affiliated hospital by order of the same bishop. They are free to act on accepted medical ethics. I have no doubt that Ireland will re evaluate both it's legislation regarding abortion and it's foundation in inhumane Catholic absolutism.  This was a woman who held no Catholic beliefs but still died needlessly because of Catholic beliefs.  That seems fundamentally wrong in a modern democratic nation. 

It makes me sick that in this case, and I grant it's unique, that a woman lived three days in agony because a medical staff refused to act on their certain medical knowledge because a law was based on a moral absolutism which took any medical decisions out of their hands.  That is unless they wanted to do the truly humane and Christian thing and break the law.  They should have.