NEWS
2001 NEWS STORIES
December
November
October
September
July/August
June
May
April
March
February
January
ARTICLES
LETTERS
ROAMIN' CATHOLIC
Contents © 2001
by Jim Holman.
All rights reserved.
NEWS
MAY 2001
TO STOP PUBLICALLY FUNDED CLINICS from prescribing the morning after pill to teenage girls, the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors voted in March to petition the federal government for a waiver that would permit the county to prohibit prescription in county clinics of the morning after pill to all women. According to the March 14 Riverside Press Enterprise, the county needs such a waiver, for federal law prescribes that agencies receiving federal aid for family planning must offer all forms of birth control that prevent, but do not terminate, a pregnancy. Though the morning after pill interferes with the implantation of a fertilized ovum, and thus is abortifacient, federal law deems it merely contraceptive. If San Bernardino County, therefore, removed the pill from its clinics without a waiver, it could jeopardize its federal funding for family planning.
In February, Supervisor Bill Postmus suggested that the county require parental consent for girls as young as 12 who might receive the pill. On Tuesday, March 13, though, the board of supervisors approved, three to two, the measure that would seek a waiver from the federal government for discontinuing the pill. The "ayes" included supervisors Postmus, Fred Aguiar, and Dennis Hansberger; the "noes" were Jon Mikels and Jerry Eaves. In another vote, the board approved, three to two, to continue receiving the grant in the interim. Both supervisors Postmus and Aguiar voted against this measure.
EMPHASIZING LAY MINISTRY does not detract from religious vocations, Roger Cardinal Mahony said during a talk at Catholic University of America in Washington, according to the April 6 issue of the National Catholic Reporter. In his talk, "Charting a Course for Participation in Mission," delivered March 20, Mahony in an aside, said, "as more and more laypeople become involved in ministry, they are a base for vocations to the priesthood and religious life." Saying that most of his seminarians come from lay ministries, Mahony added in a jocular vein: "I'm in trouble with some lay groups because so many of their lay youth ministers are entering vocations."
Mahony cautioned, though, that lay ministries should not be used as mere stepping-stones to the religious or clerical life. He stated that "a broad-based, shared ministry has been awakened in the church by the Second Vatican Council and the developments which followed." This has led, said the cardinal, to a recognition of "the role of the laity and the requirement to exercise all ministries in a communal and collaborative fashion."
CHAT WITH MAHONY. The internet site Beliefnet carries the text of an e-mail interview with Roger Cardinal Mahony conducted on February 16, 2001 during the archdiocesan Religious Education Congress. Cardinal Mahony answered questions presented by AOL members about issues facing the archdiocese and the Catholic Church as a whole.
The interview consisted of a number of "feel good" questions interspersed with some weighty ones. Besides asking Mahony how much sleep he gets and how difficult it is to run such a large archdiocese as Los Angeles, Beliefnet inquired whether woman's ordination was an "if" or a "when" issue. Mahony (whose bedtime, we learn, is 10 p.m.) answered that "the Church believes that it does not have the authority to make this change, that Jesus set up the Church in a certain way."
A participant asked the cardinal, "is there any movement towards a return to more classical Latin Liturgy, both in song and services?" "Many of us," replied Mahony, "want to retain the Latin traditions, hymns, etc., so that we don't lose that precious heritage." Asked whether he was "worried that fewer people are attending Mass and that there are more lapsed Catholics," Mahony responded that "our churches are packed on Sundays, and most are too small." He admitted, though, that "we still need to reach out to the inactive Catholics. We need to do more to welcome them home."
Two questions dealt with birth control. One person asked, "with the health and population issues in poorer areas of the world, do you foresee the Church relaxing it's stance on birth control any time in the future?" "Obviously, a very difficult question," replied the cardinal. "But the Church has been implementing many programs of approved birth control in places such as India with great success. Best aspect: these programs don't interfere with the beliefs and the customs of the local people." Another participant asked: "Where can a layperson learn more about approved birth control methods? And, are these methods just applicable to particular countries or everyone who's interested in trying them?" The cardinal did not, it appears, answer this question. The Beliefnet editoiral staff, whom we contacted, explained that "the cardinal temporarily lost his internet connection. The birth control question may have been asked right before this happened, and the cardinal's answer was therefore not recorded." The interview appears on the archdiocesan Religious Education Congress website with the same omission.
THE VATICAN has appointed Bishop Tod Brown of Orange to the thirty-member Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue for a five-year term, according to a March 15 Los Angeles Times report. The pontifical council, headed by Francis Cardinal Arinze of Nigeria, heads the Church's dialogue with non-Catholic Christian groups and other religions, such as Judaism, Islam, and Buddhism. Brown already serves as chairman of the Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs Committee for the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.
Bishop Joseph Gerry of Maine, who served as the first American appointee to the council, said Brown's appointment "is a sign of the continuing respect that the pontifical council has for our work in the United States in inter-religious relations." Bishop Brown himself told the Times that his appointment to the pontifical council will not interfere with his episcopal duties. "It will enhance my work," he said, "because I will become even more sensitive to the other faiths within Orange County."
Brown's sensitivity was demonstrated in March when he hosted a three-day Muslim/Catholic dialogue. The event included meetings, classes, and a prayer service at an Orange County mosque.
REPUBLICAN LAWMAKERS Phil Wyman and Bill Campbell have introduced into the California state assembly a bill for a constitutional amendment that would place a new restriction on abortions performed on minors. This bill, entitled "The California Family Communication and Parental Responsibility Act," bans abortions on unemancipated minors when they do not receive their parents' consent, except in cases of medical emergency, or where the court deems the child's best interest would not be served by notifying the parents. The bill was scheduled to come up before the Assembly Health Committee on May 1. So far 32 legislators support the bill.
If the state assembly passes the bill, California will join 34 other states which require parental notification before a minor may receive an abortion. The United States Supreme Court has ruled that such notification requirements are constitutional.
A SANTA MONICA ARTIST has stirred a storm of protest for her depiction of Our Lady of Guadalupe as a young Latina in the buff, according to an April 4 Los Angeles Times report. Artist Alma Lopez, in a digital print, depicted a young woman with bouquets of roses placed like a bikini around her body, and standing in a salacious pose on a half moon held up a female, bare-breasted angel. Rays of the sun encompass the woman's body-like a halo. The print has been displayed in Los Angeles, but it was not until it appeared in an exhibit at the New Mexico International Museum of Folk Art in Santa Fe that it drew any protest.
In mid March, the International Museum of Folk Art began to receive letters protesting the Lopez exhibit. On March 23, a crowd of 25, mostly Latinos, protested in front of the state office building. On Saturday, March 30, 200 people held a prayer vigil. Finally the archbishop of Santa Fe, Michael Sheehan, issued a press release that called for the removal of the piece and demanded an apology from the museum's board of regents.
In his press release, Archbishop Sheehan noted that he had found out about the controversy over Lopez's piece after he returned from a pilgrimage to Fatima and Lourdes. "To depict the Virgin Mary in a floral bikini held aloft by a bare breasted angel is to be insulting, even sacrilegious, to the many thousands of New Mexicans who have deep religious devotion to Guadalupe," wrote Sheehan. The archbishop noted that "such a picture has no place in a tax-supported public museum.
"As the Archbishop of Santa Fe I find it offensive that the Catholic symbol of Guadalupe has been so disrespectfully treated. In the recent past the Virgin Mary has been shown in contemporary art smeared with elephant dung and she has been depicted as a golden haired Barbie doll. Now this! I doubt that the Jewish community would be patient with such a mistreatment of symbols sacred to their faith. I wish those who want to paint controversial art would find their own symbols to trash and leave the Catholic ones alone."
Directors of the museum insist that the image should remain on display, and they have posted a bilingual sign warning viewers that some images in the digital art display might be offensive.
Alma Lopez expressed her surprise at the protests. "I feel that maybe the archbishop doesn't quite understand where I'm coming from," she told the Times. Lopez, who, the Times noted, is a lesbian, said of her image, "I was wanting to find a meaningful connection with La Virgen de Guadalupe. I am relating her to the women in my life, my mom, my grandma, my aunt. They had to be strong to survive, like Christ's mother." She did not mention whether these women also dress in floral bikinis.
Lopez said what inspired her depiction of the Guadalupe was the musings of one Sandra Cisneros, a writer, who wondered what Guadalupe looked like under her robes. "Roses are what you'd see if you took off her robes," Lopez remembered thinking.
Protestors at the meeting decried the assault on New Mexico's Catholic culture, represented by Lopez's Guadalupe image. Phyllis Garde of Espanola, New Mexico, asked, "Why do we have to pay for the persecution of our beliefs?" José Villegas of Santa Fe said, "what you consider 'devotion' in this type of art is not what my generation was taught by our parents, grandparents and ancestors."
A more influential voice, perhaps, than the protestors was Lloyd Cotsen of Los Angeles, former chairman of Neutrogena Corporation, who has donated his $4.5 million folk art collection and has financed a building to put it in. Cotsen wrote the museum regents in late March asking that they keep Lopez in their exhibit.
IN A UNANIMOUS RULING, the California Supreme Court upheld a state Department of Corrections rule that requires spiritual advisers to leave prisoners 45 minutes before their execution. The March 22 ruling overturned a superior court injunction that allowed the Reverend Margaret Harrell to remain with an inmate, Thomas Thompson, up to 20 minutes before his execution, which took place July 14, 1998 at San Quentin. The plaintiffs argued that depriving Thompson of his chosen spiritual adviser violated state correctional laws, but more importantly, interfered with his freedom of religion and constituted a cruel and unusual punishment. The California Department of Corrections originally wanted Harrell to leave Thompson 6 hours before his execution, but later modified it to 45 minutes.
Arguing that the presence of Harrell would interfere with preparations for the execution by lethal injection (the changing of the inmate's clothing, the attachment of a heart monitor), and that her presence in the execution chamber might distract staff, and place them in a situation where someone from outside the prison could recognize them, and so place them and their families in possible danger, the department of corrections appealed the superior court ruling. The ninth circuit court of appeals let the superior court injunction stand. The Reverend Harrell was present with Thompson up to 20 minutes before his execution.
"Because Thompson has been executed," wrote the supreme court, "we could dismiss this proceeding as moot. But when, as here, an otherwise moot case presents important issues that are capable of repetition, yet evading review. we may resolve the issues." The supreme court disagreed with the court of appeal, saying they did have jurisdiction because this was a civil, rather than a criminal, case. "Plaintiffs," admitted the supreme court, "submitted declarations from several clergy members describing the need for religious guidance as particularly critical in the last minutes of life, when access to a prison chaplain is no substitute for communication with one's spiritual adviser of choice." Plaintiffs also, wrote the court, presented evidence from other states, that allow the presence of such spiritual advisers, that contact of the sort "does not cause any security problems." Still, the court wrote that state law does not require the department of corrections to honor an inmate's request for the presence of his personal spiritual adviser if the presence of another, in-prison minister could be provided. The court also argued that the department of corrections does not have to submit to the experience of other states in similar circumstances, nor to any social-science evidence, when assessing security risks. Thus, while not overturning the superior court's injunction, the supreme court ruled that in future cases of this sort, the department of corrections' regulation depriving an inmate of his chosen spiritual director 45 minutes before execution should stand.
"We certainly do not suggest that Thompson's desire to practice his religion with his spiritual adviser of choice in the last minutes before his execution is trivial or insubstantial," said the court. "To the contrary. Many, perhaps most, religions view the last minutes of life as the time when the need for spiritual advice and comfort is particularly compelling. But prisoners do not enjoy the unrestricted freedom of choosing the time, place, and manner of practicing their religions. As the high court has observed, prison administrators, not the courts, must make the difficult judgments concerning institutional operations so long as their rules are 'reasonably related to legitimate penological interests.'"