Faith, the Flu and the Diocese of Calgary

H1N1 hysteria has hit Canada hard. In October, the new H1N1 vaccine was the leading story for weeks. H1N1 is often still the leading news story. People are panicking trying to get their vaccine.

I've alternated positions between laughing at the gullibility of people and shaking my head at the nonsense. That was until the hysteria affected me personally. (No, I don't have the flu, nor does anyone I know). But my diocese ( the diocese of Calgary) has put into place H1N1 "precautions."

These precautions include:

1. No reception of the Blood of Christ
2. No Holy Water in the fonts
3. No shaking hands during the sign of peace
4. No reception on the tongue

That last one is the most difficult for me to swallow. About a year ago (after feeling called to it for about 6 months, but being afraid to) I decided to start receiving the Body of Christ on the tongue.

I decided to do that for one reason, and one reason only. I am receiving MY SAVIOR. Literally, the Eucharist is the Body and Blood of Christ. I began to notice that after receiving in the hand, particles of Christ were still on my hand. I tried to lick them up, but that is not dignified for me, nor do I believe it demonstrates the reverence I should have for Jesus.

So, because I felt it was necessary to protect Christ, I began to receive on the tongue. I know people who say that receiving on the tongue gave them a stronger and deeper appreciation of their faith, but I can claim no such result. But I do feel it is more reverent, and it does humble me. The bottom line is, I do not like receiving in the hand. I'm paranoid that I'm dropping pieces of Christ to the floor to be trampled on.

And now, my Bishop is requiring that I do this. These rules have been in place for the past three weeks, and every mass I want to cry because of the indignity I am performing. (I know- I could refrain from taking the Eucharist, but I need the grace it gives. I need that close communion with Christ to help withstand sin. Maybe that's a position I need to reevaluate).

But I shouldn't have to. According to Redemptionis Sacramentum 92, the people have the right to choose how to receive. In fact, reception on the tongue is supposed to be the norm- reception in the hand is only an indulgence. In a letter dated July 24, 2009 the Congregation for Divine Worship (CDW) confirmed that it is not licit to deny the faithful reception on the tongue.

The edict from Bishop Henry just got worse today. He has gone one step further. Calgary has an FSSP parish- St. Anthony's. Mass there is in the Extraordinary Form, and they have been quietly ignoring the H1N1 precautions. Well, as of last Friday, Bishop Henry has shut down the parish. When someone pointed out the CDW's letter, he stated "I am well aware of what the congregation decided but quite frankly, it is not their call. It is mine. " (See the details here)

Ummm no. How can any bishop take that position? Excuse me Your Excellency, but I'm pretty sure it is the CDW's call. The Catholic Church is a hierarchy. Hierarchy's work from the top down. That means that the parish has to listen to the priest, and the priest has to listen to the bishop, and the bishop has to listen to the pope.

The reason I have been receiving in the hand for the last 3 weeks (despite the fact that it causes me great distress) is because I believe in the hierarchy, and I think the hierarchy is important. If my bishop says this is the way things are, I will do that. Unless and until the bishop is no longer obeying the hierarchy. At that point, who am I supposed to follow?

Oh, and didn't Pope Benedict issue something called Summorum Pontificum? The document that states that the laity has a right to the Extraordinary form? Yeah, he did. So not only is Bishop Henry defying the CDW (and the Magisterium), he is now directly defying THE POPE. The Vicar of Christ on Earth. The man the Holy Spirit chose to lead the Church.

Never fear, I will be writing to Bishop Henry. I request you do so as well. But be courteous. If all the letters Bishop Henry gets are rude, he will have no reason to take our concerns seriously. His e-mail address is bishopfh@rcdiocese-calgary.ab.ca. If you live in the diocese, please tell him which parish you attend, and if you live out of the diocese, please state which diocese you do live in.

And please pray for this diocese, Bishop Henry, St. Anthony's parish and all the people affected by this directive.

Until very recently, I have been a big fan of Bishop Henry. I like his no holds barred style when he talks about abortion and homosexuality, and the right of a church to get involved in public life. But this decision, and a few other ones have left me wondering what has happened to him.

Oh, and on a side note, please also pray for my old diocese- the Diocese of Saskatoon which has also suspended reception on the tongue. I know it is deeply troubling to people there. The diocese is currently without a bishop, so people really don't know who to speak to about it.

CCCB report on Lifesite’s allegations against Development and Peace re: abortion

As I have hoped (and urged the bishops to do) the CCCB's report into Lifesite's allegations has been made public. You can read the report here . The report concludes:

"We believe the allegations by Lifesite News – that financial assistance by the Canadian Catholic Organization for Development and Peace (CCODP) aided projects related to the promotion of abortion – are not founded on the facts."

Before I comment, I want to note a few things about the report especially as they are things I was concerned about in earlier posts. First, the investigation was lead by Archbishop Martin William Currie of St. John's and Bishop of Grand Falls and Bishop Francois Lapierre of Saint-Hyacinthe. The investigatory commission also included Msgr. Carlos Quintana, C.S.S., Executive Director of the National Collection for the Church in Latin America of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Msgr. Mario Paquette, P.H., General Secretary of the CCCB and Development and Peace officials; Michael Casey, Executive Director, Paul Cliche, Deputy Director of the International Programs Department, and André Charlebois, Program Officer for Latin America. The report states that the D&P officials were involved to see to "travel arrangements and other organizing." I 'm noting this because my concern has been from the beginning that D&P officials might try to hinder and bias the investigation.

Another note- The CCCB commission did speak with the Mexican Catholic Bishops during the investigation. The report does not comment on what the bishops said, except to state that: "We regret that the Mexican organizations have so little or no relation with the Episcopal Conference of their country." I'm noting this because I find it interesting that the Mexican Bishops aren't involved with these groups, and I wonder why.

Analysis

Summary

This could get to be a very long post, so I am going to quickly summarize my thoughts on the investigation here. The detailed analysis follows

1. The investigation was a wasted effort because it did not investigate the allegations made by Lifesite, it investigated the allegations D&P claimed Lifesite made, which are two very different things.

2. The investigation must have found something wrong with D&P because they did have some strong words for D&P (couched in the type of language Bishop's use) though they do not elaborate on what that may be.

3. The Bishop's do not seem to have had all the information before they did this investigation because they claim Lifesite has avoided contacting the CCCB and establishing dialogue on this issue, yet Lifesite has been in contact with the bishop's from the start

4. The only comment on any of the evidence gathered by Lifesite was directed to the piece of evidence showing that the 5 groups signed a report that advocated several positions in contradiction with the teachings of the Church (including abortion and contraception). The bishops merely stated that signing this was "imprudent" and concluded it was ok because they were merely showing solidarity with the other groups working for human rights.

My position on funding D&P has not been changed by this report. The report does not address Lifesite's allegations, nor does it address the very clear and very damning evidence Lifesite has produced which leads me to believe that D&P will continue to fund organizations that I believe support abortion. As I have stated from the beginning, if an organization I fund gives money to an organization that supports abortion- even if my money isn't directly used to support abortion- I am morally complicit in those abortions and therefore in a state of mortal sin if I know or suspect that is what the groups are doing. With all due respect to D&P and the CCCB, my soul is too important to leave to the hope that D&P is not involved, especially when I have seen clear evidence otherwise.

Detailed Analysis

Point 1

As I quoted above, the CCCB found that D&P did not aid projects related to the promotion of abortion. That is all well and good, and I'm glad that D&P isn't doing that, because that would be an even greater scandal than the one facing them. The allegations against D&P are that they are funding groups who support abortion- i.e. money D&P gives goes to worthy endeavors, but the groups are also involved in abortion related advocacy.

This is a very big difference. Essentially the allegation is that D&P is giving money to groups who use that money to build homes or dig wells for fresh water, but those same groups also support abortion. This is the problem- even if the D&P money isn't being used for abortions, the money D&P gives frees up other money to be used for abortion. Hence, those donating to D&P are still complicit in the abortions.

And, just to ensure that no one thinks I'm splitting hairs now because the CCCB investigation didn't come to the same conclusion as me, I point you to the very first post I wrote on this issue back in March where I made this exact distinction. Lifesite has been very clear from the start as to what the allegations are- it is D&P who has worked to distort those allegations. It appears to me that D&P succeeded in framing this debate the way they wanted it to go. Of course the CCCB finds no truth to these allegations- they are not the allegations Lifesite was making!

Point 2

While the investigation doesn't find any basis for the allegations against D&P they did express the hope that:

"The present circumstances encourage Development and Peace to be more vigilant in analysing requests for financial assistance and more demanding about receiving information from possible partners. While recognizing the good relations and communications that already exist between CCODP and the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops, we would encourage Development and Peace to ensure more thorough consultations with the Bishops of Canada, particularly the two Bishops who are appointed as members of the Development and Peace National Council, especially when there are questions involving moral issues such as abortion and contraception." (Italics mine)

My question is, why did the bishops feel the need to make this statement? I can only see two possible reasons 1) they found something wrong, but don't feel they have enough evidence to make it public or 2) they are attempting to make those who find the evidence compelling feel better. I can't see the bishops just providing a sop for our consciences, so I think they must have found something. I base this on the fact that the report doesn't comment on what the Mexican Bishops have to say and that it doesn't deal with all the evidence against D&P. I hope that I'm wrong on this- not because I don't think there is wrongdoing, but because the bishops are then playing a very dangerous game with the souls entrusted to their care.

Point 3

The report also rebukes Lifesite for not opening dialogue with the CCCB on this issue. I'm wondering why the bishops say this- I think it has been very clear from the coverage Lifesite has given that they have been in dialogue- if they hadn't why would 4 bishops have spoken up and withheld funding from D&P? They have to have based a decision like that on more than one report from Lifesite. In their analysis of the report, Lifesite explains how it has tried to dialogue with the bishops on this, but that the CCCB was not willing to meet with them. To me, that makes the bishop's rebuke a little hypocritical and jeopardizes any trust I might have put into the report.

Point 4

Finally, the report deals with only one of the many pieces of evidence amassed against D&P's 5 Mexican partners. The piece it does deal with- the report signed by the 5 partners along with 45 other Mexican human rights organizations that expresses support for several things that violate Church teachings (including abortion and contraception)- DOES express support for abortion by those partners; the very thing Lifesite alleged the partners were doing. The bishop's response to this is that it was merely an "imprudent" decision, and, as if it makes it all better, they note that several religious groups, including Dominicans and Jesuits signed the same document because it merely expresses a desire for greater human rights in Mexico.

WHAT!?!?!?!?

Two quick points here- first, if Dominicans and Jesuits are signing documents that violate Church teachings, the heads of their orders should be contacted, as should the Vatican, and an immediate investigation should begin. The CCCB should not be using that as an excuse for D&P's partners. That's like a kid saying it was ok to shoplift a candy bar because his two good friends did it to. What parent would accept that explanation? So why is the CCCB? Second, the bishops say it's ok because the 5 partners were just expressing their solidarity with other human rights groups. Uh huh. Isn't that the problem? If they are expressing solidarity with other groups, and that solidarity means they violate Church teachings, then aren't they a group no Catholic should support? Isn't that a little like a kid lying to his parents about going to a party he's not supposed to attend and then when he's caught just saying "oh well Jim and Joey and Mark and Sam were saying the same thing and I wanted to support them." Again, what parent would accept that? Mine certainly wouldn't.

Lifesite, in their response, claims that this piece of evidence (the report signed) was the "least significant." I don't know, it seems pretty significant to me. So if the CCCB just waves this piece away, why didn't they deal with all the other pieces. If this report is supposed to put to rest this controversy, then why didn't the CCCB deal with all the evidence? Why go all the way to Mexico if you aren't going to deal with all the evidence and allegations? What's the purpose of the investigation then.

Conclusion

I'm sorry- I still stand by my original conclusion. This report raises, in my mind, more questions than it answers. To be honest, I'd really like to know why the Mexican bishops have no involvement with these groups. If they are such worthy organizations, why don't the Mexican bishops deal with them? We can speculate until the cows come home, and it may be perfectly innocent but I want to know why, and I think the CCCB should have included in the report the testimony from the Mexican bishops they met with.

Since the CCCB didn't deal with all the evidence, how can I trust their conclusion? Even more importantly, they didn't address the right allegations, so how can I trust that D&P isn't complicit in abortion- they never investigated that! Not only that, this report only deals with the first 5 partners Lifesite made allegations against. As far as I know, the CCCB has no intention of investigating the other 14 partners Lifesite made allegations against. How can I possibly trust D&P with my funds when questions like this remain?

The bishops, at the end of the report state:

"The dignity of each human life is to be protected and promoted from conception to natural death. Thus there is an urgency to all that threatens the dignity and sacredness of human life"

If the dignity of each life is to be promoted (and it should be I think) why aren't the bishops being more careful to ensure that faithful Catholic's donations are not being used by groups who support abortion. Why are they resting on their laurels and producing short useless reports when there is the potential that human lives are being ended? How does that promote the sanctity of life? It doesn't and until they deal with this D&P will get no funding from me, and I will do everything I can to ensure that my family and friends don't donate to D&P either. Donations will still be made, but they will be made to organizations that I trust and know to follow Church teachings. Unfortunately, D&P no longer falls into that category.

Development and Peace

I said I would only post on D&P if new, major developments occurred, and there are two I want to bring your attention to.

First, the Family Issues arm of Catholic Council of Bishops in Peru has written a letter to the CCCB asking them why they (through D&P) are financially supporting the very groups that the Peruvian bishops are fighting against because of their support of abortion. You can read the letter here. The letter is very direct, and formally asks the CCCB to halt funding to the organizations. The letter states:

"It is very disturbing to have groups which work against the Bishops of Peru by attempting to undermine legal protection for the right to life of unborn children, be funded by our brother bishops in Canada"

I don't know how more direct the bishops can be. This is no longer a case of "some internet groups rabblerousing" as some bishops in Canada have suggested. There is a direct call by another council of Bishops asking the CCCB to halt the funding. I hope that this letter is the wake up call the CCCB needs.

Unfortunately, I don't think it is. The second development I want to share with you is the news that the investigation conducted by the CCCB into 5 of D&P's Mexican partners found absolutely no evidence of abortion or abortion related activity. Archbishop Weisberger of Winnipeg (the head of the CCCB) in an interview with Salt and Light Television stated:

"But I can assure you that in the report, the bishops found very clearly that there was no evidence that Development and Peace in any way funded abortion-related activities."

He also (in my opinion) questioned the credibility of LSN for making the allegations. He essentially said that we now have a choice- to believe LSN or to believe the Bishops:

"It seems that there is a tendency on the part of some people to trust allegations on websites more than they trust the bishops. That’s the role of the bishops in the Church and when the bishops investigate something, when the bishops look at things and when the bishops teach, according to our theology, we should have confidence in that."

You can read the transcript of the interview here.

I don't like Archbishop Weisberger telling me that I have to accept what the CCCB says because they are the ones with the authority on moral teachings. As anyone who has been reading this blog for awhile knows, I am a very ardent supporter of the Church and her Bishops and I believe strongly in the authority of the Magisterium. However, I think Archbishop Weisberger is being disingenuous by claiming that now that the investigation is done, we just have to trust what the Bishops have said.

We have yet to actually read the report done by the CCCB. I want to know exactly what was said by whom, and who the CCCB talked to, and how involved D&P was in the investigation itself. I believe the bishops can run a thorough investigation, but this was not one- the set up of the committee going was heavily loaded with D&P members- that's not unbiased. In law, when picking a jury, potential jurors are screened for biases they can't put aside- that didn't happen here, and it should have.

Also, the Bishops have yet to address the other 14 allegations made, and based on the transcript of the Salt and Light interview, I don't think they are going to. Maybe I am splitting hairs, but if the investigation into all the allegations is not done, how can the bishops speak authoritatively on it?

There is something rotten in the D&P organization. The proof Lifesite has offered is, in my opinion, very strong, and the CCCB has ignored it.

Lifesite has summarized the allegations and following events into a short 5 minute video- I suggest you all watch it, and ask you to pass it along to your friends.

And please, write your bishops again and ask them to do three things- 1) release the D&P report 2) investigate the other allegations 3) respond publicly to the Peruvian Bishops letter. Of course, be respectful, but make sure they understand that you are concerned about being complicit in the deaths of unborn children.

CCCB will investigate Development and Peace

In a statement ( found here ) today, the CCCB announced they were forming a committee to investigate the allegations against D&P's Mexican partners accused of supporting abortion.

From the article:

"The two Canadian Bishops on the committee which will be going to Mexico later this month, 15-18 April, are Archbishop Martin W. Currie of St. John’s, Newfoundland, and Bishop François Lapierre, P.M.É., of Saint-Hyacinthe, Quebec. They will be assisted by Msgr. Mario Paquette, P.H., General Secretary of the CCCB, and by Msgr. Carlos Quintana from the offices of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, where he is Executive Director of its Secretariat for the Church in Latin America. The committee of inquiry will report to the CCCB on its findings."

I want to thank the CCCB for stepping up and calling for an investigation. When they finish with the Mexican partners, I hope they will look at the partners in the 8 other countries.

Everyone keep praying for this situation, and if you wrote to you bishop, please thank him for the CCCB's commitment to investigate.

I hope this investigation will bear fruit.

The 10 Electoral Commandments

In keeping with the recent theme of thanking bishops who take courageous stands for life and Church teachings, I thought I'd share this link with you.

Bishop Olvera of Cuernvaca, Mexico distributed a pamphlet to all the parishes in his diocese which contained "electoral commandments" and principles to use in choosing who to vote for. The pamphlet does not specify political party, but states that "Catholics should not vote for parties favoring the legalization of abortion, homosexual unions, euthanasia, and pornography, among other policies."

I tried to find an English copy of the pamphlet, but was unable to, and my Spanish is non-existent, so we're stuck with news reports.

All I can say is thank you Bishop Olvera. We need more of our bishops and priests to stand up for the Church. If our bishops and priests won't educate the faithful on Church teachings, who will?

Archbishop denounces Lifesite

It has just come to my attention (via this Lifesite article) that Archbishop Bohan of Regina has called the allegations against Development and Peace false. He did this in a statement dated March 25. He and Archbishop Weisgerber of Winnipeg are the only two bishops to publicly claim Lifesite's allegations are untrue. Archbishop Bohan asked parishioners to continue to donate money to D&P because of "the excellent work that Development and Peace does in the world to mitigate poverty and thus save countless lives of children and vulnerable people." Speaking specifically as the "chief Shepherd of our diocesan Church" he finds the allegations to be "a malicious attack on this important and sacred work that the Catholic people in Canada do for the poor in the world through Development and Peace."

I am sure that no one is going to be surprised that I disagree strongly with Archbishop Bohan. As I have said before, the allegations against D&P are serious, and good evidence has been offered to substantiate the claims. The mission of Lifesite is to provide coverage on life and family issues occurring around the world. They are not a malicious organization out to get anyone. Instead, they are dedicated to the promotion of life. They do good investigative work, and publish their findings. Just because the investigations uncover something unpleasant doesn't mean they are malicious.

With all due respect to the two Archbishops, I think they are wrong. I think they are ignoring evidence because for some reason I won't speculate on, they do not want to admit that D&P could do anything wrong. Both men speak of the good work D&P does. Lifesite is not denying that they do good work. They are simply saying that work is all for nothing if D&P's partners are also complicit in abortion. Let's not forget what abortion is. It is the intentional killing of a human being. If D&P's money goes to organizations that support abortion, any lives they save through their other programs are negated by the evil of abortion. I do not think the Archbishops understand that.

Unlike me, Lifesite has never called for people to stop funding D&P. They are simply asking for an investigation to take place. I also want to see an investigation, but I'm also asking everyone to stop donating until we know exactly what is going on. I've heard from others who think that now that investigations are occurring, we should still donate because the money won't go to D&P until the investigation is done. I understand that position, but I disagree with it for the following reasons:

1. Not all diocese are investigating the allegations. If your diocese is not, your money might go to D&P without investigation
   
2. D&P has only promised to investigate their Mexican partners, not the other partners in 7 other countries. This means that even if they fix any problems in Mexico, there are still other problems with other partners.
   
3. D&P is conducting their own internal investigation. With all due respect, based on the denials D&P first issued, I don't think they can conduct a truly unbiased investigation.
   

Until a full, complete and arms reach investigation is completed, I don't think anyone should donate money to D&P, because the evidence of complicity in abortion is strong. Instead, take the money you would have donated to D&P and give it to another development organization that is not in any way involved with organizations supporting abortion.

With all due respect to Archbishops Bohan and Weisgerber, I think they are ignoring the strength of the evidence and as a result are giving poor advice to parishioners.

D&P Responds, More Allegations

It was a busy weekend in the D&P story. I'm going to list off and link the developments first, and then comment.

Developments:

1. On Thursday, Lifesite reported that its continuing investigations of D&P had turned up partners in Africa that advocate abortion and contraception. See story here. The partners are Women
   Advocates Research and Documentation Centre (Nigeria), Coalition Nationale des Femmes - Droits et Citoyenneté (Guinea) and Forces en action pour le mieux-être de la mère et de l'enfant (Togo).
   
   
2. On Friday, Lifesite reported that it had uncovered two D&P partners in Brazil who support abortion. See the story here. The partners are Rural Women's Movement and Federation of Organs for Social and Educational Assistance.
   
   
3. Two more Canadian Bishops, Archbishop Miller of Vancouver and Archbishop O'Brien of Kingston, announced that their diocese will investigate D&P's partners before turning over any money to them. See the story here.
   
   
4. On Friday, D&P's new President, Pat Hogan, published this response to the original allegations against the Mexican partners. In it D&P agrees to "temporarily suspend funding to all five Mexican partners."
   
   
5. I finally received a response on Friday to my questions. Sort of. I asked five distinct questions, and the response was a form letter giving me the link to the above mentioned response. Mr. Hogan's entire response to me was this:
   

   "Dear Sarah,
   Thank you for sharing your concerns with me.
   I am writing to you today as the new President of Development and Peace to share some reflections on the events of the last two weeks. It has been alleged on some internet sites recently that Development and Peace has been funding pro-abortion groups in Mexico. Nothing could be farther from the truth.
   Please read my latest statement about these events at the following link: http://www.devp.org/devpme/eng/pressroom/2009/comm2009-03-26-eng.html
   Yours in Christ,
   Pat Hogan
   President of National Council
   Development and Peace"
   

6. According to both the National Catholic Registrar and Lifesite, D&P has refused to respond to allegations that some of its Bolivian partners also support abortion. The Registrar sent a series of questions to D&P and was told by D&P's communication manager Eleanore Fournier-Tombs that, "We don't have anything to add on the article that was published about Bolivia." Interestingly, the CCCB has also refused to respond to these allegations stating they do not have the information to answer the questions.
   

So, to summarize, another 5 of D&P's 200 partners have been accused of promoting abortion. Two of the groups even define abortion as a "right" on their websites. Two more Canadian Bishops have declared that these allegations are serious enough to require an investigation. D&P has finally made a response that takes the allegations seriously and is attempting to deal with them. D&P has failed to address any of the new allegations.

Commentary

Wow. I am still shocked by how large this story is getting, and shocked by D&P's inability or unwillingness to take this story seriously.

I am impressed by the (now) four bishops who've taken action and are launching an investigation into D&P. That's all I've been asking the bishops to do. As shepherds of their flock, it is their duty to ensure that the time, talent and treasure of their flock is used in accordance with the teachings of the Church.

I am disheartened by D&P's response. In many ways, to me at least, it seems like too little too late. This story first broke on 13 March 2009. It took D&P two weeks to respond with anything but denials. Only now (I'm assuming because bishops are asking questions and the flow of money has slowed) are they actually doing anything to investigate these partners. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad they are doing it, but shouldn't these investigations have been something they did before partnering with these groups in the first place?

And, if they actually take this seriously, why are they not commenting on the other allegations made? I know it takes time to identify the appropriate course of action, but then they should respond with "we are looking into this" not "we have anything to say."

Also, why the scurrilous attacks against the people who've brought this story to light? Why is the national president responding to inquiries by concerned Catholics saying "alleged on some internet sites recently" and not noting who is making the allegations? Lifesite is much more than an internet source- it has credible journalists who back up their stories with facts. They aren't just bloggers who can get away with saying anything they want.

To be quite honest, I am disappointed that they responded to my e-mail with a form letter that didn't address the questions I asked (I posted those questions on a previous post.) The link the president gave me didn't answer my questions, which were about the process D&P uses to select partners. I know I don't have a lot of money to make donations with, but one day I might, and anyway, the size of the donation should not impact the quality of the response given.

I hope D&P follows through with its commitments to investigate all its partners. I hope they are willing to do a proper, unbiased investigation, because the evidence Lifesite has gathered is compelling to say the least. I also hope they agree to investigate the other partners allegations have been made against. In light of this whole situation, I think the entire D&P council needs to open investigations into all their partners, and make some changes to how they decide who they will partner with. In short, I think D&P needs to do some major spring cleaning before we, as Catholics, can support them again.

As always, feel free to comment, and I will let you know more as soon as it develops.

Oh, and in response to questions about where else to donate money instead of D&P, Lifesite has compiled a list of pro-life groups working in the developing world. You can see the list here.

A Wonderful First Step

The Canadian Council of Catholic Bishops (CCCB) announced today that they are giving the Canadian March for Life their full support. This is the first time in the 11 year history of the March that the CCCB has given it a nod of approval. (See story here)

I am very, very happy that the CCCB has officially noted, and supported the March for Life. Last year when the American Bishop's were speaking out for life during the election campaign, I admired them. I couldn't help but wonder where the CCCB was. As far as I am aware, they have NEVER, as a council, stated their unequivocal support for life. This surprises me, especially considering the Church's extremely pro-life position. It is the duty of each Bishop to ensure that their diocese teaches the truth to every Catholic in the diocese. There are far too many Catholics who are pro-choice today. Some are pro-choice because they don't know any better, and some are pro-choice despite knowing the Church's position. The CCCB has never addressed this issue.

I'm not naïve enough to think that this one pronouncement is indicative of a change in the CCCB's policy, but I do think it is a great first step. The CCCB has now recognized the importance of combating the culture of death. That is huge and fills me with great hope for the future of Canadian Catholics. It has been too long since the CCCB has given good, orthodox direction to Canada's Catholics. Canada has drifted to the left in terms of where it stands on life issues, and the CCCB has done nothing to stop it. Don't get me wrong; I in no way am condemning the Bishops; just trying to show my appreciation for their position today.

I believe the only way to save the unborn and the vulnerable is for Canadian society to fundamentally change how it perceives pregnancy and suffering. We do view pregnancy as a punishment or a disease instead of the joyful creation of a new life. Until we manage to shift our understanding, we will not beat the culture of death. The clergy have a huge role to play in this. Today, I am very proud of the CCCB because this announcement signals that they understand how important combating the culture of death is. God bless them and all clergy and religious.