NEWS
2002 NEWS STORIES
December
November
October
September
July/August
June
May
April
March
February
January
ARTICLES
LETTERS
ROAMIN' CATHOLIC
Contents © 2002
by Jim Holman.
All rights reserved.
NEWS
MARCH 2002
LIGHT FROM FRESNO. Bishop John Steinbock of Fresno took the occasion of the Solemnity of Mary the Mother of God, January 1, 2002 to issue a courageous pastoral letter: "Life-Giving Love of Husband and Wife In Light of the Teaching of the Church on Marriage and the Family." The pastoral treats of what seems, for most priests and bishops, a very uncomfortable subject: artificial contraception and Natural Family Planning. Writing mainly for the priests and deacons of the diocese of Fresno, Steinbock said he wants "to bring the clear teaching of the Church regarding conjugal love to our young people and couples and to better articulate that teaching."
Noting the large percentage of divorces even among Catholics in the United States, Bishop Steinbock noted the cause: "The modern world," he said, "has separated love from bringing forth life, and this influences our young people very much." The divorce rate, he notes, among those using Natural Family Planning "is miniscule compared to this high divorce rate." Natural Family Planning, he writes, "has nothing to do with contraception," but "is an expression of conjugal love that preserves the dignity of the human person and that cooperates with God in His creative power."
"Christian marriage," writes Steinbock, "demands chastity, continence and self-sacrifice." He affirms that "the teaching of the Church has consistently affirmed that marriage and conjugal love are ordered to the procreation and education of children," while allowing "reasonable grounds for spacing births, arising from the physical or psychological condition of husband or wife, or from external circumstances." Still, in those circumstances, Steinbock affirms, couples may not use artificial contraception, but may "take advantage of the natural cycles immanent in the reproductive system" to control birth.
Though the bishop says, "each couple must ultimately decide on the number of their children, we must remind our people that children are not a burden to be endured but a gift to be joyfully received. Christian parents are called in the midst of a self-indulgent world to be generous in accepting children with joy and love." Couples, continues Steinbock, "must constantly examine their consciences seriously whether they are simply being led by materialistic and selfish values in making a decision to limit their children. Those same materialistic and selfish values can slowly enter into other aspects of their relationship. A couple must keep an openness to life, putting trust also in God's providence, as they decide the reasonable grounds for spacing or limiting their children."
Steinbock affirms that Humanæ Vitæ does not say that a couple must intend to have a child in each and every marriage act, but that should intercourse take place when conception is possible, the couple must have respect for this possibility and must not frustrate it through contraceptive means." Further on, Steinbock asserts that "the teaching of the Church tells us clearly that contraception in the marriage act is intrinsically evil and a serious sin as it subverts the total self-giving love, which is by its nature life-giving."
When self-giving love is subverted, "when sexuality is separated from procreation," Steinbock warns, "anything goes. And this is exactly what we are seeing in our society today: abortion, sterilization, cohabitation, multiple divorces, homosexual marriage, surrogate motherhood, therapeutic and reproductive cloning, abandonment and killing of newborn babies, sexual exploitation of children, disrespect and degradation of women, and sexual perversion of every kind. The contraceptive mentality of separating sex from procreation is one of the root causes of our 'culture of death,' as it leads one not to respect the human dignity of another person, but to see another as an object to be manipulated for one's own ends."
Bishop Steinbock's entire pastoral can be read on the website of the diocese of Fresno at www.dioceseoffresno.org/view_story.asp?s=63.
RICHARD RIORDAN -- POLITICAL CHAMELEON? According to an article in the January 28, 2002 New York Times, Republican gubernatorial candidate Richard Riordan "says he is trying not just to win but to refashion his party's traditional conservative ideology by steering it leftward." According to the Times report, not only has Riordan avoided many typical Republican issues, such as tax cuts, but he has also adopted a "liberal social agenda" on such issues as abortion and gay unions.
In an address to Hispanic businessmen in Irvine in late January, Riordan, according the New York Times, criticized the Republican party for alienating women and Latinos -- the latter over the issue of immigration. Riordan, said the Times, is not concerned with merely changing the ideological bent of the California Republican party, but of the national party as well. If the party follows the lead of his more conservative opponents, Bill Simon and Bill Jones, said Riordan, it will become "extinct."
That Riordan, as the New York Times asserts, is "pursuing this ideological mission partly out of conviction and partly out of a desire to win statewide races," is borne out by a February 5, 2002 Los Angeles Times report, "Davis Ads Have Riordan on Defensive Over Abortion Issue." According to the Los Angeles Times, a Grey Davis television advertisement, aired February 4, 2002, shows Riordan, in 1991, remarking, "being fairly liberal-minded, I surprise myself at my emotions on the abortion issue, because I feel very -- I think it's murder." What's more, according to the Times, Riordan's foundation in 1987 gave $250 to the Right to Life League of Southern California, and in 1991, $10,000 to Americans United for Life."
Riordan, according to the Times, said he did not remember the $250 donation. As for the $10,000, he said it had been solicited by "a lawyer who I'd known well for years who was very much involved with this group. The main reason I gave was because I knew him well, and he asked me to." The donation, said Riordan, went for "advertising encouraging girls to put children up for adoption" -- a goal he says he still supports.
As for his current pro-abortion stance, Riordan said, "I don't like abortion. However, I respect and support the right of a woman to make her own choices with respect to her body." Does he still think abortion is murder? "I'm just not going to get into that," he said. "I am a champion of a woman's right to maker her own decision, so obviously I don't think it's a crime. It goes without saying."
RICHARD RIORDAN may be among those honored with burial in the crypt of Cardinal Mahony's new cathedral, according to a February 8 Los Angeles Times story. According to the story, archdiocesan officials acknowledged that major donors are among those who may take their final rest under the floor of Our Lady of the Angels. These donors include, says the Times, "Sir Daniel Donohue, head of the Dan Murphy Foundation, which contributed the initial $25 million; Rupert Murdoch and his former wife, Anna, who gave $10 million; Betsy Bloomingdale; Roy and Patty Disney; former Mayor Richard Riordan; former Dodgers owner Peter O'Malley; comedian Bob Hope; and former talk show host Merv Griffin." For those who may wonder how non-Catholics, such as Murdoch and Bob Hope, can be buried in consecrated ground, the Times notes that "church policy throughout the diocese allows an individual who is married to a Catholic or who comes from a Catholic family to be buried in consecrated ground, and that will hold true in the cathedral." Presumably this holds for public dissenters from Church teaching such as Riordan, though the archdiocese has not said specifically that he is among those considered for the honor.
The honor, though, comes at a high price. The crypt -- the largest of its kind in the United States and, with 1,300 burial places and 5,000 spaces for cremated remains, rivaling cathedral crypts in Europe -- will serve as a fundraiser for maintenance of the nearly $200 million cathedral. Though, said archdiocesan spokesman Tod Tamberg, actual prices have not yet been determined, he estimated that, based on figures from St. Patrick's cathedral in New York City, the yearly upkeep of the Our Lady of the Angels will amount to $3.5 million a year. Since the each burial spot cost the archdiocese, said another official spokesman, about $20,000 apiece, $50,000 might work as the starting price for someone's final resting place.
Though the remains of Los Angeles' five bishops will be removed to the crypt from Cavalry Cemetery, and though St. Vibiana's relics will also be placed in a chapel there, the four spots of highest honor -- the ones below the altar -- will be left open. Even Cardinal Mahony will not be buried there, said the archdiocese. In keeping with their sacred status, these burial spots will be the costliest. When the Times reporter mentioned the name of one millionaire as a possible future occupant, a church official "jocularly suggested" that even that millionaire "could not afford such an honor."
Might it be that, in the not-too-distant future, Mass in the cathedral will be said over the remains of Rupert Murdoch?
THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS on February 4 announced its support for gay and lesbian adoption of children, according to a February 4 New York Times report. "Children who are born to or adopted by one member of a same-sex couple deserve the security of two legally recognized parents," said the academy's policy statement published in its scientific journal. Legalization of such adoptions, said the academy, guarantees homosexual "families" the same security guaranteed to heterosexual families.
The academy noted that the children of homosexual parents are as well adjusted psychologically as children from natural families. According to the Times, though, Kenneth Connor of the Family Research Council disagreed. It is "regrettable," said Connor, "that the academy has succumbed to political correctness and has abandoned substantive research." Dr. Steven Nock, professor of sociology at the University of Virginia, told the Times that though he was "broadly sympathetic" with the academy's goals, existing research is not conclusive enough to support the academy's policy. While "much of the literature does generally portray the kids of gays and lesbians as doing just fine," said Nock, "the only question is whether a broad-based group of scientists would accept the literature as being objective and scientific."
The academy's new policy may have great affect on state laws. Currently three states, California, Connecticut and Vermont, have passed laws allowing homosexuals to adopt their partners' children, while in Illinois, New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts, courts have recognized such adoptions. Florida, Mississippi and Utah have banned such adoptions.
"PRIESTS WERE BRINGING YOUNG BOYS and using St. John's as a hotel," said a Tucson, Arizona based attorney, Lynne Cadigan of the Los Angeles archdiocesan seminary in Camarillo. According to the January 30 Los Angeles Times, the Catholic diocese of Tucson has settled with nine former altar boys and one former juvenile delinquent who accused four Arizona priests of sexual misconduct. The alleged molestations began in 1967; one reportedly occurred at St. John's seminary.
One of the accused priests, Monsignor Robert Trupia, said the Times, hosted "Come and See" weekends at St. John's for teenagers interested in the priesthood. According to plaintiffs' attorneys, Trupia committed numerous acts of molestation during these weekends. In a letter contained in court documents, one parent wrote that her son, who attended a "Come and See" weekend, awoke each morning "to find Trupia sitting on [his] bed and smiling at him. The bedcovers were pulled down but [he] doesn't know or remember if Trupia touched him while he slept. He does know that the door to his room was locked. The door wasn't locked when he went to bed."
Though the archdiocese was a defendant in one of the lawsuits, Tod Tamberg, archdiocesan spokesman, said "as far as I know, we didn't have to pay" any of the settlement.
PEDOPHILIA AMONG PRIESTS may be exaggerated by media attention, say some researchers and observers, according to a February 2 Zenit news report. According to Zenit, "the media attention given to Catholic clergy far exceeds that given to cases involving other religious figures."
The Zenit article quotes an editorial in the January 20 National Catholic Register: "True pedophilia is extremely rare in the priesthood," according to Phillip Jenkins, who wrote a book on the subject in 2001. "The best estimate is that 0.3% of priests are guilty. The most extensive study, which considered 2,252 priests over a 30-year period, found only one case of pedophilia -- and in that case, the abuse happened apart from the perpetrator 's role as a priest in the parish; he abused members of his extended family."
If, as the editorial claims, pedophilia among Catholic priests is no more common than among other clergy and, even, other trades, why are Catholic clergy especially targeted? One reason, said the editorial, is that "the Church's hierarchical structure means that Catholic clergy are more attractive targets for lawsuits than other denominations. You needn't sue just a parish; you can sue the entire archdiocese."
MORE ON ALTAR GIRLS. Last July, the Holy See's Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments replied to a query from a bishop who asked whether a diocesan bishop could oblige his priests to allow women and girls to serve at the altar. The Congregation replied that a bishop could not so oblige his priests.
The congregation's letter reiterated the discipline approved by the pope in March 1994 -- "the Diocesan Bishop, in his role as moderator of the liturgical life in the diocese entrusted to his care, has the authority to permit service at the altar by women within the boundaries of the territory entrusted to his care." Yet, in so permitting women to serve at the altar, the bishop, said the letter, "may not, in any way, exclude men or, in particular, boys from service at the altar, nor require that priests of the diocese would make use of female altar serves, since 'it will always be very appropriate to follow the noble tradition of having boys serve at the altar. '" Said the congregation, bishops still had the "obligation to support groups of altar boys," since male altar service has ever been a well-spring for vocations. If the bishop should choose to allow women to serve at the altar, "it would remain important," says the letter, "to explain clearly to the faithful the nature of this innovation, lest confusion might be introduced, thereby hampering the development of priestly vocations."
SEVERAL HOME SCHOOLING FAMILIES received a threatening letter from the Chino Valley District Director of Alternative Education, according to a February 8 Home School Legal Defense report. The families in question listed six or fewer students on their private school affidavits, required by California state law. In his letter, the district director "intimated" that home schooling was probably in violation of California state attendance laws. Home schooled children, too, he wrote, might have difficulty enrolling in public school or college.
Because of these concerns, the district director gave the families less than three weeks to submit copies of their teaching credentials and descriptions of their programs to his office. The families contacted Home School Legal Defense, which wrote the district explaining that the director's concerns have no basis in state law. According to Home School Legal Defense, "California law does not make any distinction between large private schools and small private schools," and so "singling out schools with six or less students is wrong." Also, according to Home School Legal Defense, state law "does not give the public school authority to evaluate or approve any private school."
Since Home School Legal Defense's intervention, the parents have received no further notices from the school district.
BY TAKING THE BATTLE against homosexual marriage into districts with a high percentage of Latino voters, pro-family activists were able to nullify an attempt by homosexuals to bring Vermont-style homosexual marriage into California. Knowing that 70 percent of Latinos in the state of California voted in favor of Proposition 22, which defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman, pro-family activists targeted Latino legislators whose districts had voted heavily in favor of that measure.
One legislator who was targeted was California assembly member Gloria Negrete (D-Montclair). At a rally held in front of Negrete's district office, her constituents called on her to reject AB 1338, the "California Family Protection Act of 2001." This act would grant civil union status to domestic partnerships. "We are here because we are concerned about homosexual marriage," said one man who identified himself as a resident of the area. During the rally, Latino leaders from Focus on the Family and the Family Research Council spoke about the necessity for the people to educate themselves about the issues of the day. "You guys are trying to make us look like a rag-tag team of people who won't get it done, but what are you running from? Why did you pull the bill?" Focus on the Family's James Oviedo told the cheering crowd regarding AB 1338 which Assemblyman Paul Koretz (D-West Hollywood) pulled on January 14, just prior to it being heard in the Assembly Judiciary Committee. "Bring it on, let's fight, let's get this over with." Oviedo challenged the bill's backers.
One Latino legislator decided to join his constituents rather than risk alienating them. When Assemblyman Dean Florez (D-Bakersfield) saw the rally outside of his district office, he immediately went out to join the rally. Saying that he supported traditional marriage, Flores told the people that he would oppose AB 1338.
Although the bill has been shelved for this year, pro-family activists are warning Californians not to become complacent. "Now is the time for people of faith, parents, pastors and community leaders to rise to a higher level of involvement!" says Cherri Gardner, the Southern California spokesman for Campaign for California Families.
RICHARD MCBRIEN'S column runs every week in the Los Angeles archidocesan weekly The Tidings. His open dissent from the traditions of the Church and routine papal bashing inspire a steady stream of letters to the editor from disgruntled readers.
But McBrien enjoys a high level of support in Cardinal Mahony's chancellery. Fr. Charles Miller, a former longtime St. John's Seminary rector who still teaches homiletics at the school, took to the pages of the Tidings recently to defend McBrien's dissent.
"If St. Thomas Aquinas in heaven reads The Tidings, he must chuckle at the criticism hurled at Father Richard McBrien by some of the readers of The Tidings," Miller writes in a letter to the editor published in the February 8 Tidings. "St. Thomas, dubbed by his detractors as 'the dumb ox,' suffered from harsh critics during his life time and even for a period after his death.... I do not imply that Father McBrien is another St. Thomas (who is?), but he is a dedicated and hard working scholar whose love for the church leads him at times to observe our defects."