Select Page

Month: February 2020

St. Joan of Valois

Posted by | Feb 4, 2020 | , |

Joan, or Jane, the physically deformed daughter of King Louis XI of France, was endowed with wonderful gifts of mind and heart. Although she suffered much throughout her life, she accepted her disabilities with patience and spent many of her days in prayer and meditation. Under the guidance of her spiritual director, a Franciscan priest […]

Read More

Tuesday of the Fourth Week in Ordinary Time

Posted by | Feb 4, 2020 | , |

Today’s first reading focuses on David’s anguish over the death of his son, Absalom. His anguish has been called one of the most heartrending passages in Scripture. “My son, my son Absalom! Would I had died in your place! Absalom, my son, my son!” The Scripture comments, “the day’s victory was turned to mourning for […]

Read More

Colorado’s Catholic bishops back death penalty repeal

Posted by | Feb 4, 2020 | , |

Denver, Colo., Feb 3, 2020 / 07:01 pm (CNA).- The Catholic bishops of Colorado have backed a bipartisan bill to repeal the death penalty that appears set to become law, after five previous attempts failed.

“I urge all Coloradans to support the effort to repeal the death penalty and help bring about a culture in our state that respects all life,” Bishop Stephen Berg of Pueblo said in a statement to the Pueblo Chieftain newspaper.

“The Catholic Church has long taught that every person, whether they are unborn, sick, or sinful, has a God-given dignity that cannot be erased or taken away. Yes, it can be marred, but it cannot be blotted out in the eyes of God,” Berg said.

On Jan. 31 the Colorado Catholic Conference said its bishops have been “active in their support for this bill.” The conference praised the State Senate for passing the repeal bill.

S.B. 20 is expected to pass the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives and be signed into law by Democratic Gov. Jared Polis. The legislation would end capital punishment for crimes committed on or after July 1.

The bill would not affect the death sentences for the three inmates currently on death row, but Polis has said he would commute their sentences if the bill passes, the Colorado Sun reports.

A key preliminary vote of 19 to 15 on Jan. 30 was split largely along party lines. Republican State Sens. Kevin Priola, Jack Tate, and Owen Hill, all co-sponsors of the bill, voted in favor. Democratic Sens. Rhonda Fields and Jessie Danielson voted against it.

The final vote, held Jan. 31, passed 19 to 13.

Tate said he thought the death penalty is ineffective and expensive and risks “executing an innocent person.” Priola cited the principle of “protecting life from conception to natural death,” Colorado Public Radio reports.

Other co-sponsors of the bill were Democrats Sen. Julie Gonzales and Reps. Jeni Arndt and Adrienne Benavidez.

In his comments to the Pueblo Chieftain, Berg cited his experience as a priest in Texas and Colorado ministering to prisoners.

“Indeed, I have witnessed the return to the faith of the most hardened criminals,” he said. “The death penalty, while it might offer a sense of short-term justice, only adds to the cycle of violence and takes away this opportunity for conversion.”

Berg also cited Pope Francis’ revision to the Catechism of the Catholic Church in 2018.

“Today there is an increasing awareness that the dignity of the person is not lost even after the commission of very serious crimes… Consequently, the Church teaches, in the light of the Gospel, that the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person,” the pope said.

In spring 2019 the Democrat-controlled Senate was set to debate a bill to repeal the death penalty, but backers appeared to lack enough votes and asked the bill to be withdrawn.

Previously, state legislators have tried to repeal the death penalty five times since 2000. There has not been an execution under Colorado law since 1997.

Auxiliary Bishop Jorge Rodriguez of Denver, speaking for the Colorado Catholic Conference, testified in favor of the repeal at a Jan. 27 hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

“The Catholic Church, many other Christians and many other people of faith believe that human life is sacred from conception until natural death,” he said. “We believe that, because God made us in his image and likeness, it is not possible to lose the dignity that confers to our lives. We are, as Jesus said, his brothers and sisters, even if we have committed great crimes or sins.”

Rodriguez told the Senate committee the death penalty “only adds to the cycle of violence.”

“If we as a society accept the idea that it’s possible for someone to lose their human dignity and be executed, then it is only a short step to say that certain classes or types of people belong to this less-than-human group,” he said. “History has shown that this is not outside the realm of possibility.”

Rodriguez cited the Christian imperative to visit those who are in prison, adding: “even those who committed horrible crimes and are in prison are not outside of Christ’s mercy.”

The inmates now on Colorado’s death row are Nathan Dunlap, who murdered four people at a children’s restaurant, and Sir Mario Owens and Robert Ray, who both had been involved in the murder of a young engaged couple, Javan Marshall Fields and Vivian Wolfe. Fields was set to testify against Ray in court on charges Ray was an accomplice in a murder case.

The murders of Fields and Wolfe helped inspire Fields’ mother, Aurora Democratic Sen. Rhonda Fields, to become active in public life. Fields was one of the strongest critics of the bill in 2019, objecting to the speed with which it passed through committee consideration.

She was again critical in Jan. 30 debate on the bill.

“What side of history do you want to be on? Who are you serving? Who are you protecting?” she said. Fields detailed her son’s murder and the court case that followed, the Denver Post reports.

“My son was innocent!” she said.

“Either we’re for public safety, or we’re not,” she added.

Rodriguez and Berg both discussed crime victims and their families.

“It is understandable that the family of a victim might feel like justice is being served by the murderer being executed, but the reality is that only God can offer true justice in eternity,” Rodriguez said.

Berg said victims and their families also can have “conversion and healing.”

“It is tempting to hold on to hatred for those who hurt you so deeply, but it consumes the lives of those who let it remain in their hearts,” he said. “Instead, when the cycle of violence is interrupted by forgiveness and faith, the opportunity exists for healing and growth in charity for victims and their families. God is able to take a great evil and transform it into an even greater good.”

Some defenders of the death penalty sought other ways to oppose repeal.

Sen. Bob Gardner, R-Colorado Springs, proposed an amendment to send the death penalty repeal to the voters. The amendment failed to pass. State Rep. Dave Williams, R-Colorado Springs, has said he would do whatever he could to block the bill without a popular vote, including legislative obstruction tactics like filibustering and asking bills to be read at length.

There are 21 U.S. states and the District of Columbia that have abolished the death penalty. The governors of California, Oregon, and Pennsylvania have placed moratoria on executions, according to the Death Penalty Information Center.

Both Pope Francis and his immediate predecessors have condemned the practice of capital punishment in the West.

St. John Paul II called on Christians to be “unconditionally pro-life” and said that “the dignity of human life must never be taken away, even in the case of someone who has done great evil.” He also spoke of his desire for a consensus to end the death penalty, which he called “cruel and unnecessary.”

And Benedict XVI exhorted world leaders to make “every effort to eliminate the death penalty” and told Catholics that ending capital punishment was an essential part of “conforming penal law both to the human dignity of prisoners and the effective maintenance of public order.”

In August 2018, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued a new draft of the catechism’s paragraph regarding capital punishment.

Quoting Pope Francis’ words in a speech of Oct. 11, 2017, the new paragraph states, in part, that “the Church teaches, in the light of the Gospel, that ‘the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person,’ and she works with determination for its abolition worldwide.”

Reasons for changing the teaching, the paragraph says, include: the increasing effectiveness of detention systems, growing understanding of the unchanging dignity of the person, and leaving open the possibility of conversion.

Fr. Thomas Petri, O.P., a moral theologian at the Dominican House of Studies in Washington, D.C., told CNA at the time that he thinks this change “further absolutizes the pastoral conclusion made by John Paul II.”

“Nothing in the new wording of paragraph 2267 suggests the death penalty is intrinsically evil. Indeed, nothing could suggest that because it would contradict the firm teaching of the Church,” Fr. Petri continued.

Read More

US bishops oppose expansion of immigration restrictions

Posted by | Feb 4, 2020 | , |

Washington D.C., Feb 3, 2020 / 06:01 pm (CNA).- The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops is decrying a Trump administration order that expands, by six, a list of countries whose citizens are restricted from immigrating to the United States.

The Trump administration on Jan. 31 expanded travel restrictions to include those seeking to move to the United States from Nigeria, Sudan, Tanzania, Eritrea, Burma, and Kyrgyzstan.

“The proclamation restricting immigration further undermines family reunification efforts and will make ensuring support for forced migrants in the designated countries more difficult,” the chairs of several USCCB committees said Feb. 2.

“We respect that there are challenges in assuring traveler documentation and information exchange between countries as a means to ensure the safety of citizens. However, we also believe that ill-conceived nation-based bans such as this injure innocent families…We urge the administration to reverse this action and consider the human and strategic costs of these harmful bans.”

The statement was signed by Bishop Mario Dorsonville, auxiliary bishop of Washington and chairman of the USCCB Committee on Migration; Bishop Joseph Bambera of Scranton, chairman of the ecumenical and interreligious affiars committee; Bishop Jaime Soto of Sacramento, chair of the Catholic Legal Immigration Netowrk, Inc.; Sean Callahan, president of Catholic Relief Services; and Sister Donna Markham, president of Catholic Charities USA.

The formal announcement from the White House stated that each of the six additional countries identified in the January 2020 proposal has deficiencies in sharing terrorist, criminal, or identity information with the United States.

Visas that can lead to permanent residency will be suspended for nationals of Nigeria, Burma, Eritrea, and Kyrgyzstan, while nationals of Sudan and Tanzania will not be able to apply for the “diversity visa” lottery.

Nigeria is the most populous nation in Africa and is approximately 50% Christian.

The United States issued more than 7,920 immigrant visas to Nigerians in the 2018 fiscal year, and of these, 4,525 went to the immediate relatives of American citizens, and another 2,820 to other family members, The New York Times reports. Nigerian immigrants sent back $24 billion in remittances to Nigeria in 2018 alone, the Times reported according to the accounting firm PwC.

The Times reported that nearly 30,000 Nigerians overstayed their nonimmigrant visas in 2018, citing US Department of Homeland Security figures.

The new policy will take effect Feb. 21, the White House announcement said. Immigrants who obtain visas before then will still be able to travel to the United States, officials told The New York Times.

Special Immigrants, whose eligibility is based on having provided assistance to the United States Government, would be excepted from the new policy, the White House said.

The Trump administration’s original executive order restricting immigration was issued Jan. 27, 2017, prompting hundreds of demonstrators to gather at airports. The order was modified and went through several court challenges.

In addition to the countries added in January, the order bars entry of some citizens of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Yemen, Venezuela, and North Korea. Chad was on the original list, but has since been removed.

Lawyers, advocates for Muslim immigrants, and other critics said the administration’s travel ban still constituted a “Muslim ban” since most of the countries under the ban are Muslim-majority.
The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the travel ban in June 2018, ruling that President Donald Trump was acting within the limits of his authority when he enacted the travel ban on nationals from seven countries.

At the time of the ruling, leaders of the U.S. bishops’ migration committee and religious freedom committee said the travel ban “targets Muslims for exclusion, which goes against our country’s core principle of neutrality when it comes to people of faith.” The Supreme Court “failed to take into account the clear and unlawful targeting of a specific religious group by the government,” the bishops said.

Read More

Will Catholic voters pick the winner in Iowa?

Posted by | Feb 4, 2020 | , |

Des Moines, Iowa, Feb 3, 2020 / 05:35 pm (CNA).- As Iowa becomes the first state to kickoff the 2020 Democratic presidential primary, Catholic voters could help decide the winner.

The Iowa Democratic caucuses began on Monday, with registered Democrati…

Read More

#9437 Open Forum for Non-Catholics – Jimmy Akin

Posted by | Feb 4, 2020 | |

Non-Catholic callers are welcome to call and ask any question about the Catholic Church.
Questions Covered:

04:08 – I was baptized as an infant and am currently in RCIA. What will happen if I die before I am confirmed? 
14:28 – How do you …

Read More

#9436 Open Forum for Non-Catholics – Steve Ray

Posted by | Feb 3, 2020 | |

Non-Catholic callers are welcome to call and ask any question about the Catholic Church.
Questions Covered:

04:20 – If the papacy is not the antichrist, who or what is it? 
07:33 – Did Mary have pain during childbirth? If she did, that mea…

Read More

Priest pulls lawsuit against Ft Worth’s Bp Olson, but allegations remain dizzying

Posted by | Feb 3, 2020 | , |

Fort Worth, Texas, Feb 3, 2020 / 03:48 pm (CNA).- A Fort Worth diocesan priest who resigned his post and later attempted to rescind his resignation has dropped a lawsuit against Bishop Michael Olson and the Diocese of Fort Worth— a lawsuit which alleged that the bishop had defamed him by implying he is a threat to children.

In June 2018, Olson asked Father Richard Kirkham, former pastor of St. Martin de Porres parish in Prosper, Texas, to resign his pastorate, because the priest did not report to authorities what appeared to the bishop to be a case of a priest abusing a vulnerable adult.   

Last week, Kirkham dropped the lawsuit he had filed in June 2019. In that lawsuit, Kirkham and his attorney had argued that the bishop had, in interviews with the Star-Telegram, implied that Kirkham’s removal was because he posed a danger to minors and the vulnerable.

According to Kirkham’s attorney, John Walsh, the lawsuit was dropped because Olson eventually clarified that Kirkham’s resignation did not result from any failure to report the sexual abuse of child, and there are not any allegations that Father Kirkham has sexually abused a child.

In 2017, Kirkham apparently became aware that a Dallas priest, whose name has not been publicly released, was having an affair with a married Church employee.

According to court documents, Kirkham and the priest were friends, and would often speak lewdly over alcoholic drinks.

In May 2018, Kirkham wrote a letter to the priest. Kirkham claimed in the letter that while the two priests had been having drinks at a restaurant, the priest had related to Kirkham graphic details about his alleged sexual encounters with the woman.

The letter depicted in graphic sexual detail what the priest had allegedly told Kirkham about the alleged affair.

Also in the letter, Kirkham threatened to tell the priest’s bishop if the affair continued.

“You have admitted to me more than once that you have a drinking problem, you can’t stop, you black out,” Kirkham wrote to the priest in the letter.

“You are a substance abuser. You have an addiction to pornography, masturbation and sex. Your behavior is reckless and risky. You need to seek help.”

Though Kirkham never formally reported the alleged affair, the letter came to the attention of the Bishop Edward Burns of Dallas, because the Dallas priest shared it with him.

But the Dallas Diocese says the alleged affair might have never actually occurred.

“The allegation of an inappropriate relationship between two adults was looked into and denied by both parties,” Annette Gonzales Taylor, Director of Communications for the Diocese of Dallas, said in a statement to CNA this week.

“The priest in question was on a leave of absence while the allegation was looked into and assigned to a parish afterward.”

The Dallas diocese has not officially disclosed the accused priest’s name.

A Fort Worth spokesman told CNA that the Dallas diocese has not officially communicated the results of their investigation to Fort Worth.

Olson said in a Dec. 15, 2019 pastoral letter that he learned about Kirkham’s letter to the Dallas priest from Burns, who sent him a redacted copy. The priest’s first name, “Paul,” and the parish, “St. Francis,” remain visible.

Olson says he spoke to the Dallas priest with Burns’ permission. He told the Star-Telegram in July 2019 that he knows the Dallas priest, having served as his seminary rector, but says he does not have “a peer relationship with him.”

Olson said in his December letter that he asked Kirkham to resign because he had failed to report what he suspected to be the abuse of a vulnerable adult.

“Father Kirkham claimed to have learned about the alleged misconduct that he obscenely detailed in the letter over half a year before writing the letter to the other priest, but he never reported it.” Olson said.

Pat Svacina, Director of Communications for the Diocese of Fort Worth, told CNA that the term “vulnerable adult” is not “denoted by definition” in the diocese’ policies, but that “as bishop, [Olson] made the judgement that this was a vulnerable adult situation that should have been reported immediately.”

According to the Star-Telegram, Kirkham admitted in a Jan. 7 deposition that he recognized the relationship between the priest and a church employee as abuse against a vulnerable person, but also that he never planned to make an official report.

Svacina also said that Bishop Burns had, after “an investigation,” concluded that the Dallas priest’s alleged affair had not occured.

Despite this, Svacina said that Bishop Burns had not contacted the Fort Worth diocese directly with the results of the investigation into the Dallas priest accused in the letter.

“Bishop Burns never informed Bishop Olson what the investigation [was],” Svacina told CNA.

“We learned it through news reports, when the Dallas Diocese told news media there that they investigated and found no grounds for [the affair]. We don’t know the details…what we know is through the media.”

Olson said he asked Kirkham in June 2018 to resign, and Kirkham did, but he later retained an attorney and sought to rescind his resignation, which is permitted under canon law. Olson refused to reverse Kirkham’s resignation, and Kirkham appealed the decision to the Vatican.

The Congregation for Clergy upheld his resignation in July, and Kirkham is currently awaiting the results of his final appeal.

Kirkham was at first unable to retrieve his belongings from the rectory where he was living because Olson ordered the locks changed while Kirkham was out of state, the Dallas Morning News reported. A judge in June 2019 allowed Kirkham to reenter the rectory to retrieve his belongings.

Kirkham did not respond to CNA’s attempts to contact him for comment.

A number of Texas Catholics, in the form of an online group called FRK Advocates, have formed a website raising questions about Olson’s judgement in disciplining Kirkham, and blaming Olson for the resignations of two other diocesan priests and the closure of a mission church.

Olson has said there were no disciplinary issues with either of the priests mentioned by the group, and that he was surprised at their resignation. He also defended his decision to close San Mateo Mission, noting that the Congregation for Clergy has twice upheld his decision to do so.

FRK Advocates sent a petition to the Vatican during Nov. 2019, signed by about 1,500 parishioners from 20 parishes in the Fort Worth diocese, asking Pope Francis to remove Olson as bishop. The petition detailed alleged verbal abuse to several diocesan priests in the Fort Worth Diocese and alleged verbal abuse and demeaning conduct towards parishioners.

In a Jan. 28 pastoral letter, Olson did not mention Kirkham’s failure to report the alleged abuse as a reason Olson asked for his resignation. Olson said in that letter that he had asked Kirkham to resign because “I had come to believe that Father Kirkham needed to take a step back from ministry.”

“I had previously issued him a formal rebuke for dishonesty, and he had also acknowledged to me that there were issues that he needed to address,” Olson continued.

“This was especially apparent in light of the deeply disturbing letter he sent to a priest of the Dallas Diocese which contained many lewd communications they had shared over drinks.”

 

Read More

Canadian archbishop warns Trudeau over new ‘assisted dying’ laws

Posted by | Feb 3, 2020 | , |

Ottawa, Canada, Feb 3, 2020 / 03:30 pm (CNA).- The president of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops has written to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau decrying the effort to further expand euthanasia within the country. 

“We strongly urge the Government of Canada, before proceeding further, to undertake a more extensive, thorough, impartial, and prolonged consultation” on Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) legislation, Archbishop Richard Gagnon of Winnipeg wrote last week.

The archbishop told the prime minister that a delay in further legal changes was urgently needed “in order to ensure all pertinent factors–social, medical and moral–are carefully and thoroughly considered,” wrote Archbishop Richard Gagnon of Winnipeg. 

The letter, dated January 31, was also addressed to three members of Trudeau’s cabinet as well as the leaders of the other four parties represented in Canada’s parliament. 

Gagnon called the proposed changes to MAiD legislation, which include advance directives and allowing those who do not have a reasonably foreseeable death to be euthanized, “deeply troubling.” 

“Further attempts to make (MAiD) available to mature minors, the mentally ill, and the cognitively impaired are evidence that the current safeguards are inadequate and can be legally challenged and overturned,” he said.

In September, the Quebec Superior Court ruled that MAiD should not be restricted to those with a terminal illness or a “reasonably foreseeable death.” The Canadian federal government announced that they do not intend to appeal the decision and will let it stand. The law will go into effect in March. 

Prior to this decision, a Canadian would have to be an adult with a “reasonably foreseeable death” in order to be eligible for an “assisted death.” There is no legal requirement for a patient to possess a prognosis of a certain number of months or weeks left to live in order to receive “assisted death.” 

In Canada, patients have the choice of either self-administering the lethal medication, or having a doctor do it. The vast majority of MAiD cases involve a doctor administering the drugs. 

Gagnon said that the bishops were “disappointed and deeply concerned” by this decision, as well as by a Department of Justice questionnaire that provided Canadians an opportunity to weigh in on the legalization and eligibility criteria for MAiD patients. 

Although the bishops “agree in principle with consulting Canadians,” they found the questionnaire to be flawed on multiple levels. 

It is “inappropriate and superficial to use a survey to address grave moral questions concerning life and death,” wrote Gagnon. He added that he believed that the two-week for responses was “entirely insufficient” to study the issue of euthanasia. 

Gagnon also raised concerns that the questionnaire was biased towards increased eligibility for MAiD, and neglected to address concerns regarding the outside factors that may cause a person to wish to end their life. The archbishop said that consultation on the euthanasia question “should take account of the full rage of factors that can influence a decision to request euthanasia/assisted suicide,” such as loneliness, inadequate medical support, a lack of family and community assistance, or psychological crisis. 

Instead of MAiD or euthanasia, Gagnon said that Canada should expand access to palliative care services. 

This, he argued, would result in fewer people seeking to end their lives. Presently, most Canadians do not have access to palliative care, and it is not guaranteed to be fully funded by the country’s Health Act. Conversely, Canadians have both a right to widely-available MAiD services, and the procedure is fully funded. 

Gagnon explained that the Church’s ministry of attending to the sick and protecting the sick means that Catholic institutions, in addition to everyday Catholics, dedicate their lives to assisting the sick and suffering. This history is motivating their opposition to euthanasia and the proposed expansions. 

“We listen to those who, gripped by a physical or psychological crisis, see no reason for going on,” he said. “All of these people are endangered by euthanasia/assisted suicide. They need our steadfast support, our advocacy, and indeed the protection afforded by the very safeguards this government is trying to overturn.”

Read More

Recent Comments

    Categories