DO YOU KNOW? Series Article #20

 

DO YOU KNOW? Series Article #20

AN ARCHBISHOP CARDINAL FOR THE AGES!
 
THE TRUE STORY OF HOW JAIME CARDINAL SIN, ARCHBISHOP OF MANILA, OVERCAME POLITICAL CORRECTNESS TO AVERT VIOLENCE!

1.  This Is A Real Life Example For Catholic Clergy & Others With Moral Authority In A Secular World!

We must start with the premise that, because of our gift of free will from our almighty God and the fall of mankind through the sin of Adam and Eve, the world is Satan’s domain and will be until Jesus comes the second time.  Hasn’t secularism and moral relativism been on the march throughout biblical history, even more so as the population of our world increases, and especially over the last century?  Thus, challenging this growing materialism and immorality in our society, which falls to all of us but especially our Christian churches and their leadership, becomes more and more difficult as time passes.  Our clergy are trained to be lovers, not fighters.  They teach peace and prayer through God’s love for His servants.  Isn’t the seminary a place of learning for God’s theology and evangelization and not military or even verbal warfare?

In an abbreviated manner, if you agree with this element of a biblical worldview, maybe the seminaries must change their teaching objectives to better prepare future clergy how to apply God’s love in a more “Tough Love” manner in order to combat Satan’s growing competence in attacking us as Jaime Cardinal Sin did in this story of deceit, murder, corruption, tyranny, and, finally, triumph of prayer and God’s love to avoid the slaughter of thousands of people.  The historical account of this episode by the press falls far short of reporting what really happened to prevent disaster in 1986.   An expanded account of this presentation can be found in the book “God & Government” by Charles Colson, the founder of Prison Fellowship International, who encountered Cardinal Sin when he held a news conference at Colson’s Triennial Symposium in Nairobi, Kenya on August 3, 1986.  

Speaking at that conference, he said:  “Justice without mercy is tyranny, and mercy without justice is weakness.  Justice without love is pure socialism, and love without justice is baloney.” 

2.  Do Our Bishops Have The Courage To Aline The Church With Opposition To Defeat A Demonstrable Evil?

It’s one thing to denounce the injustice of immoral laws and Supreme Court decisions, to picket and demonstrate at the killing centers of abortion providers for 168 hours per week and 40 day vigils, to proclaim the Church’s teaching about respect for life once a year from the pulpit, and issue righteous outrage at the mistakes of fellow Catholics, but God expects more of us, clergy and laity, when the systemic killing of 50 million unborn babies continues unabated and infanticide is promoted by the president of our country while he proclaims the removal of 35 years of laws to restrict those abortions.   As you will see, Cardinal Sin acted decisively using only God’ s weapons of prayer , fasting, tough love of his people, his opponent, persuasion of his opponent’s armed forces, preaching penance, conversion, spiritual revival, and his courage to do the right thing against all odds and achieve a peaceful honorable result.  The magnitude of the evil we face is no less than that of Cardinal Sin and his fellow Filipinos.  Isn’t the moral survival of our nation and our christian faith at stake today?

Francis Schaeffer in his book “The Complete Works of Francis E. Schaeffer: A Christian World View” put it this way:  “If there is no place for civil disobedience, then the government has been made autonomous, and as such, it has been put in the place of the living God.”  As Catholics, don’t we already know we have a responsibility to not only disobey immoral laws but also to strive to cause their repeal?   Do we have a higher calling when it involves the right-to-life?

After reading the story of Cardinal Sin, we believe you will conclude it is time for the Catholic Church to inform the president of the United States, his administration, and the media that support him, that the Catholic Church, as an organization, will actively promote and support their opposition in all future elections unless they formally and actively denounce their support for abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research, human cloning, and homosexual marriage, which are the basic immorally evil policies to a culture of life in our society. 

3.  The Saga of Jaime Cardinal Sin, His Archdiocese, Benigno & Cory Aquino vs Ferdinand Marcos’s Tyranny!

Jaime Sin was born in the Philippines, the seventh of sixteen children.   He was ordained a priest on April 3rd, 1954 and a bishop on March 18th, 1967.   He was appointed Archbishop of Manila on March 19th, 1974.   On May 24th, 1976, Pope Paul VI summoned him to join the College of Cardinals.  He was its youngest member until 1983.  He died in 2005 at 76 years of age and received state honors during his funeral mass. 

Ferdinand Marcos was born in Sarrat, Ilocos North on September 11th, 1917.   At 18, Marcos committed his first murder when he shot the winner in his father’s congressional election on the evening of election day.  In 1965, after many years in and out of prison and Filipino politics including vice president from 1954 to 1961, he won the presidency.  In 1969, he became the first Philippine president to win a second term.  In the following month, the most violent and bloody public demonstrations in the country’s history began.

 

EXCERPTS & CONDENSATIONS FROM CHAPTER 23 OF CHARLES COLSON’S “GOD & GOVERNMENT” ON THE BLOODLESS PHILIPPINE’S REVOLUTION, FEBRUARY 1986  

1.  The Most Remarkable Confrontation Between Church & State In The 20th Century.

Benigno Aquino was the boy wonder of Philippine politics — mayor of a large town at 22, governor of a province at 28.  Until the day in 1972 when Ferdinand Marcos, the corrupt president of the Philippines, had him thrown in prison, he had expected to become the next president when Marcos’s two-term limit was to expire in 1973.  But Marcos had no intention to ever leave office, so Aquino wasn’t the only political opponent imprisoned, just the most popular one.  In addition, Marcos declared martial law in 1972, using the communists as cover to rape his country and enable him and his corrupt buddies to stash the country’s wealth in their own Swiss bank accounts, while 50% of his countrymen were starving and unemployed.

During his most despondent period in prison, Aquino’s mother sent him a book, “Born Again,” written by another prison inmate, Charles Colson, the Special Counsel to President Richard Nixon, who had served time as a result of the Water Gate scandal.   Aquino finally read it, it made a difference for him, so he asked forgiveness from God, and gave his life to Jesus right there in his jail cell.   He immediately knew what he had to do — his new purpose now, with God’s help, would be to save his country from its tyrannical government.   Influenced by President Carter, Marcos released Aquino from prison in 1980 but wouldn’t allow him to return home.    He figured he’d be elected if he could run for president.  He told Charles Colson, if Marcos threw him back in prison, he could be president of Colson’s Prison Fellowship and, his conversion had been so complete, he grinned, saying “…if I’m killed, I’ll be with Jesus.”

Meanwhile, after eight years of marshall law, Marcos’s corrupt military found it more to their benefit to ravage the poor in their country than to fight the Marxist guerrillas, even murdering and arresting Catholic priests and nuns helping those in need to subsist and to learn the word of God.    In August 1983, Benigno Aquino finally decided to return to the Philippines, telling a congressional subcommittee:   “It is true, one can fight hatred with greater hatred, but … it is more effective to fight hatred with greater Christian love… I have decided to pursue my freedom struggle through the path of non-violence, … Only I will suffer solitary confinement once again and possibly death… But by taking the road of revolution, how many lives other than mine, will have to be sacrificed?”

Before departing Taiwan for Manila realizing the uncertainty of his trip, he prayed to do God’s will.   His wife, Cory,  read the bible to him over the phone from Massachusetts, and he spoke with each of his five children, writing each a letter after he hung up.   He hoped to join 20,000 of his supporters upon arrival for a march to Marcos’s Palace, but upon arrival, three khaki-clad soldiers boarded the plane, took Aquino off and shot him in the back of his head at the foot of the stairs to the service exit with the din of people, newsmen, and cameramen shouting, screaming, and cursing at the soldiers.  

Two million people attended his funeral in bad weather and the newly appointed Cardinal, Jaime Sin gave the homily.  Nobody believed the government’s story that a Communist gunman did the deed, but many were so shocked the whole country was about to unite into action.  Cardinal Sin predicted to Colson, “This is the beginning, when people will be opening their eyes.”  Aquino’s murder shook a nation and the Catholic Church, in the person of Jaime Cardinal Sin, was about to choose sides and in two and one half years Marcos would be gone and Aquino’s wife Corazon would be president of the Philippines in a bloodless transition. 

In 1984, Cardinal Sin was reported to be the most popular man in the Philippines by the New York Tines.  Why?  He was certainly well-liked, a remarkable wise preacher with high character, and a jovial rich sense of humor, but, more significantly, the Marcos government was in shambles, unjust, and fighting among themselves, caring not a twit about their people, so the Cardinal and his Church represented the true authority in their country.  Despite this and Sin’s criticism of the government’s human rights abuses, he declared his actions as representing God and not the political opposition.   His perspective on the current state of his country was:  “When God wants to punish a people, He gives them unjust rulers, like Marcos.”   The answer is for the people to repent and seek God.   And that they did in droves even at weekday masses.   There was great fear in the country about the future, so Sin started bible studies, prayer and fasting so his people would complain to God and not cause a stir with the do-nothing  government.   

2.   The Church Withdrew Its Moral Legitimization For Its Government In Manila And Held The State Morally Accountable Before God.           

In late 1985, when Marcos suddenly announced he was calling for a new special election for president for February, 1986, Cardinal Sin called for a meeting with him, which he had done many times in the past, and asked:  “… Your term of office is due to end next year.  Why are you calling for a snap election?”   The Cardinal was perplexed.   Marcos was sick and must have known he was very unpopular.   Sin was obviously looking forward to Marcos’s retirement automatically when his term ended even though marshall law had already kept him in power since 1972.   So, he came to find out what Marcos was up to.   He must have suspected that Marcos had a scheme to stay in office.   He was about to find out and he wasn’t going to like or accept it.

Smiling, Marcos simply said:  I want to have a fresh mandate from the people.”

“It is very dangerous for you to call a snap election,”  Sin replied.  “You may lose.  You will be forced to step down.”   Marcos knew he wasn’t going to lose because he simply planned to steal the election with the help of his corrupt government apparatus.

Mockingly keeping his smile, Marcos lets the Cardinal have it.  “You think that you understand politics, which they never taught you in seminary.  So you interfere.  When you should support your government in its struggle against Communists, you instead disturb the peace by criticizing.   But you do not understand the way things are done.   I cannot lose an election to an opposition that is hopelessly divided.   They will tear each other to pieces.”  

Of course, this was a typical tyrant response; there is never a united opposition to a beloved ruler.   So, Marcos was using subterfuge to avoid the truth of his hidden agenda to continue in office by rigging the election, expanding his tyrannical rule, and further enriching himself at the expense of his people.    So, Sin now knew what he came to find out and his worst fears were confirmed.

Cardinal Sin was angry and, staring at Marcos, he slowly and solemnly told him;  “Sir, I will unite the opposition in order that there may be a fair election.”  

Never before had he taken sides in a political election and married the Church to the opposition, always careful not to do that.  He stood up, and said  “Goodbye,… may the Lord come down to protect our people.”   He whirled around offering no handshake and left.  He knew he had crossed his self-imposed line on staying politically neutral, but he also knew exactly who he would get to unite the squabbling opposition — Cory Aquino.

3.  The Amazing Conspiracy Between Jaime Cardinal Sin, Cory Aquino, and the Holy Spirit to Defeat a Tyrant!!

The Cardinal knew Cory Aquino well.   She was the only one of the many potential candidates who wanted the presidency that could take the maximum advantage of her husband’s popularity and his assassination at the hands of Marcos and raise the level of opposition from politics to one of morality.  She had deep Christian faith.  He knew she was the best person for the job because she had no interest in the trappings of the position, only for the welfare of the Filipino people.

There was one major obstacle.  Sin talked to her several times about running for president.   Everytime she said no because she claimed she had no aspirations for political office at any level.   But, unknown to Sin, the Holy Spirit was at work.   Suddenly, out of the blue, after a huge worship celebration at Manila’s Luneta Park attended by six million people, Sin returned home to find Cory Aquino there waiting for him.

She announced, “I’ve decided to run.”  Not having a political party, she indicated,  “I will run alone.” 

Here is where the Cardinal knew he had to get to work and actually help Marcos’s political opposition.   He   persuaded her to run under the UNIDO party with its leader, Laurel, as her running mate and then made the commitment, “I will get him to agree if you accept him first.”

She agreed, fell to her knees, her hands together in prayer.  Sin then blessed her, saying, “…you will win.”   He had now consciously crossed the line to stay.

4.  The Holy Spirit Was Just Getting Started!

Cardinal Sin’s spiritual initiatives of the last two and a half years — prayer, preaching for repentance and conversion, bible studies, and revivals –  along with Cory Aquino’s very popular festival of democracy campaign accompanied by lots of prayer now during the election, was having an enormous impact on the entire population.   She embodied everything they loved about her husband and was seen as the housewife pressed into politics in order to fulfill her husband’s need to free their nation from the despotic rule of a corrupt dictator.

For his part, a confident Marcos was showing his true colors and made no attempt to hide them outside the Philippines.  The whole dirty scene, if you remember, was shown on American television in February of 1986.   We shockingly witnessed gunmen sweeping in and stealing ballot boxes from polling places, votes being purchased, thousands of voters forcibly being driven from the polls by Marcos’s armed henchmen.

None of this, however, was reported locally.  State-controlled news programming proclaimed it was a normal election  in the Philippines.   Despite this, though, millions of Filipinos personally witnessed the election being stolen as they were going to the polls.   In addition, Cardinal Sin, two weeks before the election, had already put this expected eventuality into the hands of God when he issued this statement:  “If a candidate wins by cheating, he can only be forgiven by God if he renounces the office he has obtained by fraud.   There will be no divine forgiveness for this act of injustice without a previous decision to repay the damage done.”

However, as one would expect, Marcos and crowd followed through on their plan to steal the election knowing full well they could not win it by popular vote in a fair election.   One week later, February 14th, 1986, the National Assembly, mostly Marcos cronies, proclaimed Marcos the electoral winner.    The Catholic bishops issued a statement,  “The people have spoken.  Or tried to.  Despite the obstacles thrown in the way of their speaking freely, we the bishops believe what they attempted to say is clear enough.   In our considered judgment the polls were unparralled in the fradulence of their conduct.”

Manila was erupting with angry people into serious unrest, so Cory Aquino called for a protest rally on Sunday, the 16th, at downtown Luneta Park.  Marchers came from all directions and sectors of the city;  more than a million arriving at the park almost simultaneously ready to do whatever Aquino requested of them, including storming Marcos’s Malacalang Palace.   

Instead, Aquino had a plan, likely inspired by the Holy Spirit.   She asked them for a day of prayer followed by a series of peaceful protests boycotting banks and businesses owned by Marcos and his corrupt buddies in the government and including a city-wide noise barrage every evening after her address on the Catholic radio station.  They were to continue this until the government conceded.  She told them:  “You have given a lot to the country, but in the coming days you will have to give more.  We thought election day was the day of our redemption, but it proved the start of our further struggle.”   That’s tough-love leadership, the type Christ exhibited when on earth.   A young Catholic bishop read the Bishops’ statement above voicing the Church’s support for nonviolent civil disobedience, saying:  “A government that assumes or maintains power through fradulent means has no moral basis.  If it does not of itself freely correct the evil it has inflicted on the people, then it is our serious moral obligation as a people to make it do so.”

American reporters left the rally perplexed, asking themselves how could this nonviolent, prayerful approach make a revolution?   They had good reason to ask.  Marcos had all the guns.   But, he and the media were completely oblivious to Cory Aquino’s and Cardinal Sin’s silent partner.

5.   The Nonviolent Holy Spirit Rides Again! 

All was not loyalty within the Marcos ranks who carried the guns.  Many of the younger officers had previously already begun holding secret prayer meetings and bible classes questioning when it is right for the military to disobey immoral  orders to make false arrests or to torture their own countrymen during interrogations.   They became known as the Reform Group.   So, because they felt that Aquino was the rightful winner of the election, they approached the minister of defense, Juan Ponce Enrile, with their desire to oppose Marcos.  So, a massive split in allegience to Marcos had developed that no one expected because, years before, some God-fearing officers had come to Christ to find the answers they couldn’t get in their military training.

When Marcos discovered their desertion plans, by Friday, the 21st, he began assembling loyal troops to put down the rebellion.  On Saturday morning, Enrile received a phone call warning him of impending arrest or death.  He had to act quickly to either leave the country or find cover where he and his supporters could fight back while they appealed for popular support.  At about three o’clock, he helicoptered into Camp Aguinaldo, the ministry of defense headquarters on the edge of Manila.   With only a few hundred troops on duty, it was practically defenseless against Marcos’s tanks.  Enrile called his wife and asked her to reach Cardinal Sin for help from the people. 

At 6:30 pm Saturday night, Enrile and Fidel Ramos, a respected general in the Army, held a press conference, covered live on Radio Veritas, the Catholic station.   Enrile announced to the nation in very strong language the unequivacal decision they had made:  “We can no longer support Marcos as our commander-in-chief — because of our honest belief that he did not receive the people’s mandate in the election.  I believe in my heart and mind that Mrs. Aquino was duly elected president of the Philippines…. We will never surrender, and if we are assaulted, we will all die together.”

6.  Cardinal Sin Displays The Leadership Which He Had Warned Marcos He Would Use To Unite The Opposition!

Nobody could have predicted what took place next, because under these circumstances, death was certain for the renegades at the Camp when an overwhelming force attacked.  But, once again, no one except Mrs. Aquino and Cardinal Sin had not yet recognized the presence of their third partner in this conspiracy. 

At 9:00 pm that night, Cardinal Sin put that partner to work.  On Radio Veritas, he ordered all nuns into their chapels where they were to pray continuously until God the Holy Spirit delivered the Philippines.  Then he spoke to all Christians.   “Go to Camp Crame and Camp Aguinaldo.  Lend your support to Enrile and Ramos.  Protect them and bring them food to eat.”

Thirty minutes later, two million unarmed Catholic believers and Protestant evangelicals turned out onto the streets, listening to Radio Veritas, praying, singing all night long and making their way to the camps while wondering how to carryout the Cardinal’s command to protect the soldiers there. 

Sunday morning, Marcos’s first mistake of the day, he chose the sabbath to attack the camps.  A long column of tanks and trucks carrying a regiment of marines headed toward the camps.  The people pushed dozens of cars and buses into the intersections to stop the tanks.  Between the vehicles and the crowd, mostly women and children praying and holding out crucifixes, there was no room for  the tanks and trucks to manuver.   They were forced to a grinding halt unless they were willing to run over people, who offered the soildiers flowers while they congregated around the  trucks.   An old woman in a wheel chair cried out to the soldiers to just kill her if they must, but don’t kill their own people.   Another shouted,  “We’re all Filipinos!  What are you doing?  Don’t kill us.” 

Still another threw her arms around the general, calling out his name ,  “You have a wife and children too!  Don’t do it!  Don’t kill us in the name of a dictator!”

The soldiers had never met an “enemy” like this.  Nobody was fighting them.  They weren’t even being insulted.  The soldiers didn’t know what to do.  These people had no fear.  How could the soldiers fire on them?  The general, after accessing the huge number of people in front of him, took off his bulletproof vest and told his aides:  “We don’t want to kill civilians.  Our quarrel is with Enrile and Ramos.”   With his bullhorn from the top of a tank, he told the crowd that the tanks must be allowed to pass.  “We will not hurt you.  We have orders to enter Camp Aguinaldo.”

The general gave his order to start the tanks and demanded the people to get out of the way.  “No, no!” they shouted, as the tanks creaked forward amidst loud screams anticipating the first bodies to be crushed, many of them priests and nuns who had joined the peaceful demonstration by kneeling and praying the rosary in front of the tanks.   Nobody moved.  Everyone in front of tanks refused to jump out of the way.   Suddenly, without an order from the general, the tanks, all of them, simultaneously stopped — and SILENCE exploded onto the scene for what seemed like an eternity. 

It was finally interrupted by prolonged cheering in the crowd as tank drivers opened their turrets and bemused soldiers observed masses of happy Christians surrounding their vehicles welcoming the soldiers to come down from their perches and join the celebration.  On Monday morning dozens of tanks were still sitting silently around the military camps with the soldiers who had remained being fed breakfast by the people who stopped them in their tracks. 

On Tuesday, the defeated Marcos fled the country and Cory Aquino began her first year as president of the Philippines.   Her husband, Benigno, had been killed by an assassin, but the belief and faith he had in his country lived on in his spouse and permeated the entire population, assisted by a brave and courageous Catholic Cardinal and his silent hero, the Holy Spirit.  In just two and a half years, Marcos was gone after a miraculous bloodless “revolution.”   Cory Aquino served six years as president.   Cardinal Sin was reprimanded by the Vatican for involving the Church in political affairs of the state, but, nearly a year after the revolution, he was still the most powerful individual in the Philippines.         

AREN’T THERE SOME SOCIAL INJUSTICES BY SECULAR GOVERNMENTS THAT ARE SO MORALLY EGREGIOUS THAT GOD EXPECTS THE CHURCH TO CHOOSE SIDES?  This Is The Subject Of The Next Article

DO YOU KNOW? Series Article #19

DO YOU KNOW? Series Article #19
 
 
WILL THIS BE ANOTHER CASE WHERE, AS BISHOP FARRELL SAID AFTER THE ELECTION ABOUT OUR CHURCH, “WE DIDN’T DO ENOUGH,” AND, ONCE AGAIN, WILL WE LOSE MORE MORAL GROUND?

1.  Why Is There No Effort By Our Church Leadership To Rescind The Invitation To President Obama?
 
As Bishop D’Arcy points out in his letter, the U.S. Catholic Bishops did, in fact, cover this precise contingency in 2004 when they established the regulation, referred to in Article #18 above, that:  “The Catholic community and Catholic institutions should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles. They should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions.”  With that policy in place when this happened, it doubles the damage in the eyes of the public to say nothing about the eyes of our Almighty Father.  Shouldn’t the Bishop require that Father Jenkins withdraw the invitation in obedience to this previously stated policy and apologize to the President for his error that resulted in the University issuing the invitation without clearing it with the Bishop of their diocese?
 
Wouldn’t this strategy minimize the damage and regain the moral initiative, much better than the potential drastic consequences to the Church as a standard bearer of a pandering Obama speech, as only he can deliver one, at the citadel of Catholic education in this country?  Isn’t the magnitude of the University’s error just begining and still unknown?  If the firestorm already is beyond all expectations, what will it be after Obama gives his speech if he is allowed to do it?  Will it be another instance of the moral weakness of the Catholic Church and a blow to restoring our Catholic identity that the Pope charged us to do last year?  
 
He will say all the right things necessary to maximize public relations for his position in consort with Planned Parenthood while convincing his Catholic audience that he is at least pro-life enough to want to find common ground with our desire to reduce abortions in this country.  It will all be  misrepresentations or cover up about his true desires and the true goals he has in store for his anti-life agenda and he will say it in nuances and phrases that will have the audience cheering and clapping by the end of his speech. 

2.  Does Cardinal George Prefer That The Invitation & Honorary Degree To Obama Be Rescinded?

I believe the Cardinal is one of the few relatively conservative Bishops in our Church leadership based on his strong position on the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA).  His statement about the Notre Dame fiasco said:  “…it is clear that Notre Dame didn’t understand what it means to be Catholic when they issued this invitation.”  But, most of the rest of his statement sounded like he was making excuses for why he wasn’t calling for a rescindment based on the 2004 U.S. Bishops’ statement which says:  “The Catholic community and Catholic institutions should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles.  They should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions.” 

He prefaced his remarks by noting that even though he is president of the USCCB, he doesn’t have jurisdiction or authority over other bishops.  Then he says his role has “some moral authority, without any kind of jurisdiction or any sort of real authority.” And then he said;   “As president of the U.S. Bishops’ conference I have to precisely speak for the bishops and not in my own name, as I could as Archbishop of Chicago.”   Well, why can’t he precisely speak in his own name as Archbishop of Chicago in addition to giving the consensus of the USCCB administrative committee?   Barrack Obama, after all, although non-Catholic, is still one of his Chicago archdiocesan citizens.   The hidden agenda here probably is that rescindment was discussed, Cardinal George is for it, but the liberal democrats on the committee who voted for Obama are carrying the day to just issuing a politically correct statement.
 
The Cardinal explained that he had contacted both Father Jenkins and his administrative committee several times. He said;  “That conversation will continue…whether or not it will have some kind of consequence that will bring (perhaps rescindment), I think, the University to its understanding of what it means to be Catholic.   That is, when you are Catholic, everything you do changes the life of everybody elese who calls himself a personal Catholic–it’s a network of relationships.”  

As Bishops Farrell & Vann said in their joint statement last October before the election;  “To vote for a candidate who supports the intrinsic evil of abortion or ‘abortion rights’ when there is a morally acceptable alternative would be to cooperate in the evil–and, therefore, morally impermissible.”   Doesn’t the action of Father Jenkins and the ND Board support the intrinsic evil of abortion and, therefore, is just as morally impermissible?   Certainly this action is much more detrimental as a public example of Catholic values than someone casting a secret ballot in a voting booth.

 3.  How Hopeless Must The Plight of Unborn Babies Be For Catholic Leadership To Reject Political Correctness?

The conduct of the clergy in charge of the Notre Dame fiasco is atrocious for its lack of courage to fight back against the snares of the devil.  Both Cardinal George and Bishop D’Archy immediately rejected any consideration, let alone action, to rescind this horrific mistake by Father Jenkins and his board committee at Notre Dame.  And now, Father Jenkins is responding to the uproar of our Catholic laity over this by compounding his error with the suggestion that the 2004 U.S. Bishops’ statement above was meant to apply only to Catholic invitees.  When we ask them to “fight back” we aren’t asking them to take up arms to do it, we simply want them to show some backbone for the moral prerogatives of our faith over the sin of political correctness when dealing with our post-Christian moral relativist society.  

In his statement, Cardinal George finds it necessary to provide us the disclaimer that the U.S. presidency “is an office that deserves some respect,” and that Notre Dame would not disinvite the president, since “you just don’t do that (disinvite the president of the United States).”   Why not?  Because it’s politically incorrect?   I wonder if the Cardinal bothered to ask himself if Jesus would have done it.   After all, Christ used physical force to throw the reprobates out of the Temple in Jerusalem and He’s still the embodiment in our world of an All-Loving God.   All that “disinvite”  or “rescind” means is that Father Jenkins sends the White House an Email or other communication withdrawing the invitation because of the president’s positions on the life issues with which the Catholic Church disagrees, or something similar.   Also, shouldn’t the Cardinal be telling Obama that he shouldn’t be accepting this invitation because “you just don’t do that (speak at the citadel of Catholicism when you are pro-choice)?” 

What the Cardinal seems to overlook is that we are in a battle as serious as any arms-bearing war of Us versus Them.   And, right now, we’re losing.   God sent us that message when Barrack Obama and his cabal, including our country’s main stream media, won the 2008 American election.   Since then, he has declared WAR on the youngest members of our family!  If we want to change that, we have to stop and change what we’ve been doing or we’ll get more of the same in 2010, 2012, and beyond.   That means our liberal bishops who supported Obama in the election and continue to  practice political correctness to Obama’s benefit must stop.  For one thing, isn’t that sinful in the eyes of God when it supports a president who promotes the murder of babies, born and unborn. 

Bishop D’Arcy also has his own disclaimer: “I wish no disrespect to our president, I pray for him and wish him well.  I have always revered the Office of the Presidency.  But a bishop must teach the Catholic faith ‘in season and out of season,’ and he teaches not only by his words — but by his actions.”  Well, why hasn’t he acted to rescind the invitation and remove Father Jenkins from his job or explained the reasons for not doing that?  

I have to ask Cardinal George, Bishop D’Arcy, and Father Jenkins why and how they can respect Obama or his distorted and criminal use of the Office of President?   Do you also respect the presidents of Cuba, Venezuela, Russia, Iran, North Korea, etc., and their offices as they are using them to kill and suppress thousands of their people.   One can respect the office of president as it was established by our Constitution, but can you separate respect for the office from respect for the holder of it as if they both are in a vacuum?   It’s like suggesting you can separate one’s religion from one’s politics.  Obama has used his office to:

1)  Rescind Bush’s Mexico City policy banning the use of our tax dollars to fund international abortions…

2)  Introduce legislation to eliminate the conscience clause allowing medical professionals to reject doing abortions…

3)  Promise to sign bills containing the other freedom of choice clauses that would reverse every state pro-life law   restricting abortions…

4)  Renew funding for the United Nations that enabled China’s one-child and abortion laws…

5)  Increase funding of destructive embryonic stem cell research… and,

6)  Of course, his legislative history shows that he would support infanticide if such a bill ever showed up on his desk.

Haven’t we come to a time now when clergy in our church who make mistakes like this must be held accountable with real consequences that reverse the damage to our Church’s moral standing.   Will anyone ever believe that Cardinal George and Bishop D’Arcy are unable to arrange for the rescindment of that invitation to Obama?   Of course not.  Doesn’t Bishop D’Arcy have the authority to remove Father Jenkins from his position since Notre Dame is a Catholic institution?  Don’t he or Cardinal George understand what a Saul Alinsky trained community organizer does to achieve his/her political agenda that has more to do with instigating public unrest for political ends than with the welfare of the people?  Now, as it pertains to his political agenda on the Freedom of Choice clauses, Obama knows exactly what he’s doing and he knows he has his feared dissidence from the Catholic Church on those issues above firmly under control if the Church doesn’t find a way to rescind Notre Dame’s invitation.

It appears the Catholic laity must take the action that our clergy should be taking.   Thank God for Randall Terry and Operation Rescue.   His interview with Archbishop Raymond Burke at the Vatican last month is a clarion call to our U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops that the Vatican will no longer be silent to the lack of moral fortitude, pluck, and guts among our Church leadership in America who put their liberal political worldview and lifestyle ahead of their vows to save souls in the service of their Almighty God.   Aren’t those who don’t just as responsible if they aren’t following the Lord’s message about the wicked man in Ezekiel 33:7-9?   As the booklet, “Faithful Citizenship,” revealed to us, their political correctness not only was used against us by the Obama campaign, but it also undermined the effectiveness of the truth with which we were educating our own laity.   Result, 54% of Catholic voters voted for Obama, 6% more than voted democrat in 2004.

Ten years ago, Father Matthew Habiger, as Director of Human Life International instructed us:  “Our task within the household of faith is clear and daunting, my brothers and sisters.  It must be made abundantly clear in pulpits, in classrooms, in the lecture halls of our colleges and universities, in the Catholic press, in the way we vote, that to be Catholic is to be unconditionally pro-life.”   In addition, I would ask now in the 2009 world, can a real authentic Catholic be a democrat? 

DO YOU KNOW? Series Article #18

THE NOTRE DAME FIASCO!  HAS NOTHING CHANGED SINCE THE POPE’S VISIT?

.
OUR CATHOLIC CHURCH LEADERSHIP IN AMERICA IS STILL NOT FIGHTING BACK HARD ENOUGH!  POLITICAL CORRECTNESS STILL RULES
.
1.  How Could The Notre Dame Invitation Have Happened?
.
Despite Pope Benedict XVI’s strong engagement with U.S. Bishops and representatives of Catholic Universities during his visit last April about recultivating the Catholic moral identity of the Catholic Church in America and placing the responsibility for that task on our bishops and University administraters in very clear language, somehow Notre Dame’s standing invitation to newly elected presidents of the U.S. was either overlooked or ignored.  Is it possible that the autonomous nature of their authority diluted their desire to obey the Pope’s instructions and very little reform took place since last spring, including leaving the standing invitation in place?   Of course, we don’t know for sure if the University actually sent an invitation to Obama or whether he simply was told by his staff that it exists, he told them to accept it, and to notify the University that he was coming.  However, the March 24th statement from Bishop D’Arcy, Bishop of the Fort Wayne/South Bend Diocese, says that: Father John Jenkins, CSC (President of Notre Dame), phoned to inform me that President Obama had accepted his invitation to speak to the graduating class…”  That sounds like a fresh invitation was sent before acceptance and without checking with the Bishop first.
.
In his statement, after revealing his decision not to attend the graduation, Bishop D’Arcy makes an excellent observation about Obama having “…now placed in public policy his long stated unwillingness to hold human life as sacred.  While claiming to separate politics from science, he has in fact separated science from ethics and has brought the American government, for the first time in history, into supporting direct destruction of innocent human life.”
.
2.  Should the Church Rescind the Invitation & the Law Degree?
.
It’s hard to believe Bishop D’Arcy doesn’t even address this in his statement. Doesn’t this situation give the Catholic Church a perfect opportunity to follow the Pope’s lead to show the world that we are fighting back against the evil forces of the devil instead of quietly acquiesing into the sin of political correctness when it comes to the issue of life?  It requires our leadership to exhibit the courage needed to tell President Obama that  the   University must rescind our invitation because of his extreme anti-life policies.  Our two bishops here in Dallas and Fort Worth, Bishops Farrell and Vann, have already set the tone for this with their now famous Joint Statement before the election  which reminded us all of the Church’s moral teaching and our responsibility when voting in elections: 
“To vote for a candidate who supports the intrinsic evil of abortion or ‘abortion rights’ when there is a morally acceptable alternative would be to cooperate in the evil–and, therefore, [be] morally impermissible.” 
This could be the most politically INCORRECT public statement on voting by a Catholic Bishop since Roe v Wade.  They could have added that such an act is a mortal sin requiring reconciliation before receiving communion, a factor that Nancy Pelozi, Joe Biden, and a large number of the so called “declared Catholic” politicians in Congress ignore at their peril when their time comes to stand before the Lamb of God at His Throne. 
 
FYI:  A “declared Catholic” is one who continues to publically represent themselves as a Catholic after they have automatically excommunicated themselves from the Catholic Church community by commiting grave sin and receiving the Holy Eucharist without reconciling that sin with the Sacrament of Penance and Reconciliation (confession of sins to a priest).  See Paragraphs #1422, #1423, #1424, and #1463 in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
.
3.  Letter to Bishop Farrell to Ask His Support For Rescindment.
 .
Dear Bishop Farrell,                                                                               March 26, 2009
 
We imagine you are as outraged as we are about the Notre Dame president’s invitation to Obama to speak and receive an honorary degree at commencement in May.  Please, your Excellency, tell us all how on earth this happens less than a year since our Pope was here and instructed American bishops that; “It falls to you to ensure that the moral formation provided at every level of ecclesial life reflects the authentic teaching of the Gospel of Life;” immediately after stating the obvious that “…one of the great challenges facing the Church in this country is that of cultivating a Catholic identity…”? 
 
It’s less than five months since your and Bishop Vann’s extremely strong Joint Statement, and the most vocal chorus of American bishops speaking out about educating Catholics before an election that any of us have seen since the Roe v Wade decision.  Unfortunately, it was too late to do any good and, as a matter of fact, the 54% of Catholic voters who voted for Obama was the highest percentage and the highest number to vote for the anti-life candidate since Roe v Wade
 
Here are some of the questions I have and that I’m hearing from some of our parishioners:
.
   1)  Why did Bishop D’Arcy not know about this invitation before it was made, given time to consider the ramifications and invoke the 2004 statement of the U.S. Catholic Bishops that Bishop D’Arcy refers to in his letter forbidding this exact kind of activity in our universities?
   2)  Why was Father Jenkins and his Board of Directors even considering this without the Bishop’s knowledge?
.
   3)  Why wasn’t the 2004 statement especially honored because of the Pope’s visit and, if not then, certainly after all of the flack over Nancy Pelosi‘s and Joe Biden’s remarks and the election of Obama?
.
   4)  Is Cardinal George putting in motion the necessary process to rescind this invitation recognizing the uprising for this among our faithful nationwide who are signing internet petitions in droves and on the behalf of the parents and students at Notre Dame?
-
   5)  Do Cardinal George and all of our Church leaders realize the future damage that will be done if this invitation is not rescinded?
 
Barrack Obama has shown in just over two months that he will do everything he said he would about taking to the offensive when it comes to his definition of “women,s rights” and satisfying the anti-life agenda of Planned Parenthood and their cabal.  If the Catholic Church allows Obama to make that speech, your Excellency, he will consider it as a signal and even a message that he’s going to get little or no meaningful resistance to his plans, including the gradual passage of every clause in the FOCA bill.  All senators and congressmen who received those postcards from the Church’s FOCA mailing will totally disregard them if they are anti-life or feel they have no support if they are pro-life.  And, you can bet that Obama relishes this outcome, that he couldn’t wait to accept that invitation, and that he sees this as an opportunity to use this bone-head mistake by Father Jenkins and the ND Board of Directors against the Catholic Church just as Catholics For Obama did with Faithful Citizenship.  It’s the typical destructive tactics of a Saul Alinsky trained community organizer on the south side of Chicago.  He uses our misplaced adulation to get our acceptance to do exactly what we oppose with minimal resistance. 
 
Shouldn’t Bishop D’Arcy do much more than just not attend the commencement if Obama is the speaker?  Shouldn’t he and Cardinal George find a way to rescind this invitation, first through the ND Board of Directors based on the clamor from the Catholic community, the letter written by Mr. Anthony Lauinger on behalf of his eight children, who have attended Notre Dame, and the 2004 statement from the U.S.Bishops.  Secondly, if that doesn’t work, ask the Vatican to intervene, and lastly ask Obama to withdraw his acceptance as a gesture of respect for the Church’s respect life values.
 
In addition, Your Excellency, Cardinal George can expect more of these blows to our Church’s moral standing with the public for as long as over 50% of Catholic voters continue to support liberal politicians in elections for whatever reason.  For one thing, this means that probably 50% or alot more of our clergy, including bishops, do as well.  Is it not now obvious that if you are a Catholic, you can’t be a democrat.  Essentially, every Catholic politician, based on Archbishop Raymond Burke’s remarks during the election, who supported Obama have automatically excommunicated themselves.  Shouldn’t a press release from the USCCB announce this to the world.  
 
I sincerely pray for all of our authentic Catholic laity and clergy who support this president for anything he wants to do, because he has absolutely no moral integrity to be trusted with any issue after displaying loud and clear his DNA on the subject of life.  Like Bishop D’Arcy, I will also pray for Obama because he is one of God’s creatures, but unlike the Bishop, I do not respect him, only the office.  Mr. Obama is America’s mortal enemy.  He’s more dangerous to the practice of our faith and to our country than Osama bin Laden  because he’s looking and acting more and more like the anti-christ of the Book of Revelation.
 
Thanks for doing what you can to help our Church in this matter.  I know you’re busy, so maybe you can answer those questions for us when I see you at the Banquet and also give us your feedback on my January email about more pray-ers at the abortion clinics.
 
God bless you.
 
Charles Suter
TRANSFORManagement
2306 Creekside Cir. S.
Irving, TX 75063
972-401-0471

DO YOU KNOW? Series Article #17

WHAT IS REALITY FOR AMERICA NOW?  HOW LONG DO WE HAVE?  WHAT DOES THE HISTORY OF CIVILIZATIONS TELL US?

WHAT IS GOD’S REAL MESSAGE TO US  FROM THE ELECTION?

What does our Creator have in mind right now for His world, the United States of America and its people?  If John McCain and Sarah Palin had been elected last Tuesday, we’d still have some restraint on the immoral direction of our country and its spiral into a liberal Godless society.  With Barrack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid now in charge of the three branches of government (yes, that includes the Supreme Court), isn’t the bottom of socialistic decadence in full view now with a wide open slippery slope?

Well, I’m all in favor of searching for the good that always accompanies the bad.  Our Lord always provides for those who love him, so Christians should continue to pray one of the ten prayers He always says “YES” to:  “Please, Lord, Bring Good Out of This Bad Situation.”  

Of course, nobody really knows what God’s message is to us from this election.  Many don’t believe God sends messages to us.  For others, His message could be: “You’d better get your affairs in order,” meaning your spiritual affairs.  To His believers, He might be saying: “Watch for the day marshall law is declared and be ready to follow your guardian angel to the refuge prepared for us for a 3 & 1/2 year period of tribulation.”  In case you think I’m kidding, there are thousands of refuges already set up around the world.  But, that’s a subject for a future “Do You Know” article.

HOW LONG DOES THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA HAVE?

So, let’s look at the future we can see coming, mostly because there is nothing visble to stop what’s already in motion and has been since Adam and Eve: The democracy or civilization countdown-HOW LONG DO WE HAVE? Many of you have probably heard what a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh, Alexander Tyler, told us in 1787 about the fall of the Athenian Republic 2000 years ago: “A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government”…it exists only ”until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.”  Didn’t FDR’s New Deal get that started in earnest and then, Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society bring on an enormous government welfare system until it was reigned in by a Republican Congress in 1994.

Tyler continues:  “From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.”   And now we see the collapse of Jimmy Carter’s and Bill Clinton’s affordable housing for the poor, programs perpetuated and aggravated by liberal control of Congress since 2006 that culminated last month in the crash of our credit and housing markets despite calls for reform by the Bush administration.

BONDAGE TO BONDAGE IN 200 YEARS

Tyler goes on:  “The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations from the beginning of history has been about 200 years…during (which) those nations always progressed through the following sequence:

  1. FROM BONDAGE TO SPIRITUAL FAITH…
  2. FROM SPIRITUAL FAITH TO GREAT COURAGE…
  3. FROM COURAGE TO LIBERTY…
  4. FROM LIBERTY TO ABUNDANCE…
  5. FROM ABUNDANCE TO COMPLACENCY…
  6. FROM COMPLACENCY TO APATHY…
  7. FROM APATHY BACK INTO BONDAGE.”

WHERE ARE WE NOW ON THIS LIST & HOW FAST ARE WE MOVING?

Joseph Olson is a professor at Hemline University’s School of Law in St. Paul, Minnesota.  He uses some demographics from the 2000 presidential election to provide a benchmark for determining how fast we are moving down this list from our present position.

In the 2000 election:

  • Democrats won 19 States, Republican won 29…
  • Democrats won 580,000 square miles, Republicans won 2,427,000…
  • Democrats won the county population of 127 million, Republicans won the county population of 143 million…
  • The murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by Democrats was 13.2, in counties won by Republicans 2.1.

Professor Olson adds this:  “In aggregate, the map of the territory won by Republicans was mostly land owned by the taxpaying citizens of this country.  Democrat territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government welfare.”  Olson believes the United States is somewhere between the “complacency and apathy” phase of Professor Tyler’s definition of democracy, with some 40% of the nation’s population already having reached the “governmental dependency” phase.

By comparing those demographics above from the 2000 election with the same demographics from this 2008 election after they are published, it will give us an idea of how fast we are moving on this slide and help tell us how long before we return to bondage, according to Professor Tyler.  If Congress and our new president grant amnesty and citizenship to millions of alien illegals as they have said they want to do for the unspoken reason that it will increase their voter base for the next and future elections, how long do you think we have before we are in bondage again, five years?  Ten years?  Twenty years?  Throw in the liberal’s propensity to spend money, create larger deficits, raise taxes, and cut our military, then answer that question again.

How many times have you heard, read, or been told that great empires, great nations, and/or affluent civilizations destroy themselves internally before external forces cause their destruction?  Over 90% of our founding fathers were Christians who came to this conuntry to regain their freedom of religion.  Now, with the removal of our Supreme Creator from our public lives just about everywhere we turn, doesn’t the election of an anti-life president along with his culture of death colleagues tell our God that the majority of our people see Him as irrelevant?  Do you think for a moment His message is telling us He doesn’t care about that or that if we keep doing what we’re doing that He will give us the grace to overcome evil after all?  Not likely.  It’s more likely He is telling us to prepare for the day John describes in Revelation as the last decisive battle between good and evil that we call Armageddon.    

Ask yourself these questions:  If New Testament Scripture tells us that Christ will be coming again and spends one whole book describing a devastating encounter between Christ and the forces of the devil, is there any chance there will be a peaceful negotiated settlement because our world is getting holier and less evil?  Since just the opposite is in full view for all to see, with moral relativism becoming more and more the secular religion of our society, with the election of our new president and more of his culture of death political party purveyors of corruption, who is going to decide what’s good and what’s evil, what’s right and what’s wrong?  Do we even talk about it in our Catholic Churches on Sunday mornings?  Do we even recognize ”mortal sin” anymore because it could be too offensive to the secular generic Christian Catholics in our parishes?

 AS CHRISTIANS, CAN WE DO ANYTHING ABOUT OUR CONDITION? 

As disciples in Christ’s war with Satan, no matter how bleak the battlefield appears, don’t we have a moral responsibility to win the battle for souls even knowing that, until Christ does come, we probably will continue losing the war?  So, here are some things we can do as Christians and as a Church:

#1.  SPEAK LIKE JESUS WOULD! 

According to Raymond de Sousa, a Catholic Apologist who heads up Saint Gabriel Communications International in Perth Australia: In discipleship for God and His Gospel today…“we live in a time when our culture is politically correct and we think in terms of ‘perhaps’ and ‘maybe’ and ‘how we feel about it.’  But, that is not how Jesus Christ thought (or spoke), when He said for example, ‘He who is not with Me is against me,’ or ‘He who does not gather together with Me scatters abroad,’ or ‘Let your communication be yes, yes, or no, no.’   The whole Sermon On The Mount is a clear teaching on morality.”  In other words, don’t be defensive or wishy washy about your faith.  Look for opportunities to be a witness to Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross as your safety net for the challenges and losses of life and to be a refuge for those who aren’t blessed with a relationship with God.

Pope John Paul II, when he spoke to the youth in Spain in 1981 about the spiritual background we must have within us for morality gave us a prescription and a technique for Christ like discipleship, said:  “Learn to think, speak, and act in accordance with the evangelical simplicity and clarity of: YES, YES, NO, NO.  Learn to call GOOD,  GOOD, and EVIL, EVIL; to call BLACK, BLACK, and WHITE, WHITE; to call SIN, SIN, and not to call it liberation or progress even if fashion or propaganda are opposed to this teaching.” 

#2. IMPLEMENT THE CARLIN PLAN IN ANSWER #3 OF ARTICLE #9.  

In considering the task the Catholic Church has in front of it now, what should a vigorous surviving Church look like?  David Carlin’s eleven positive characteristics of an anti-secularist non-denominational Catholicism in Article #9, promugates the antithesis of, denounces, and publicly opposes modern secularism.   The Catholic Church, its clergy and its laity, must make the “religion” of moral relativist secularism our religious mortal enemy, and act and talk like it.  No longer can we be silent both in the public square and from our Church pulpits.   Now that we have clearly  identified our enemy, we must not change our values to match his, rather we must strengthen them to overcome his. 

Make no mistake, Barrack Obama and his liberal democrat secularist party leadership, along with their mainstream media, are and will be as destructive to our free, constitutionally based, and Christian way of life as any outside enemy such as Islamic terriorism.    

#3. STOP THE FREEDOM OF CHOICE ACT FROM BECOMING LAW! 

For the immediate future, we must defeat FOCA.  Cardinal George, President now of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, said in his statement at the end of the USCCB’s fall assembly that: “the unity desired by President-elect Obama and all Americans at this moment of crisis will be impossible to achieve,” if the administration’s policies increase abortion.

He also warned Obama about mis-reading the results of the election when he said:  The recent election was principally decided out of concern for the economy, for the loss of jobs and homes and financial security for families,…. If the election is misinterpreted ideologically as a referendum on abortion, the unity desired by President-elect Obama and all Americans at this moment of crisis will be impossible to achieve.  Abortion kills not only unborn children; it destroys constitutional order and the common good…. Aggressively pro-abortion policies, legislation (like FOCA), and executive orders will permanently alienate tens of millions of Americans.”

It was important that the Cardinal make this statement as soon as he has after the election because Obama’s Alinsky Black Liberation Theology training has him watching closely for this kind of advanced uncategorical warning to his plans.  If the Cardinal, as President of the USCCB, and the Catholic Church as a whole do not quickly, visibly, and persistently establish the moral high ground on this satan-like culture of death, devisive law; Obama, his administration of pro-abortionists, and their media protectionists will pass this legislation before the end of January. 

The flaw in Cardinal George’s statement is that it was not made in the form of a personal letter to Obama and the Congress of the U.S. and sent to them directly with a copy to all of the major media outlets.  We must hear about  his message and additional messages through the main stream media or we’ll loss this battle as well. 

Ladies and gentlemen, fellow parishioners, the leadership in our Catholic Church, after what happened on November 4th as one of the most devastating defeats to our pro-life efforts since Roe v Wade, cannot continue to fight this war for life in the same manner they have since 1973 and expect a different outcome in the next four years.  With the help of just a handful of our bishops, Priests For Life led by Father Pavone, EWTN, President Bush’s Supreme Court appointments, and some non-Catholic organizations like Focus on the Family and Family Research Council, the laity of our faith had brought us to the brink of total success of ending federal legal abortion.  Please realize, we stand to regress all the way back to ground zero where we were on January 22nd, 1973 if Obama is successful in gaining passage of FOCA. 

Until the last five to six weeks before the election, our Church hierarchy was absent from the effort to defeat Obama for president, in which effort they were encouraged to participate before the 2004 election.  Bishops Kevin Farrell and Kevin Vann of the Dallas and Fort Worth Dioceses respectively finally stepped out in leadership with a joint statement that was actually powerful enough to be heard and criticized by the secular media around the world.  Nothing less than that bold courage they displayed in October is now required of them in order to continue that leadership in bringing about and carrying out a much greater Catholic Church and Christian public battle strategy to defeat Obama’s pledged passage of the Freedom of Choice Act.

Resistance.com has already collected several hundred thousand signatures on a public petition to prevent the passage of the resurrected “Fairness Doctrine” to squash the conservative dissent of talk radio.  This and more will have to be done led by our Catholic and Christian hierarchy in order to stop passage of FOCA.  Nothing we do will accomplish that, not five million signatures and Congressional letters will matter if Church leadership stays silent and refuses leadership of this effort.  It must begin immediately if we are to have time to get it done.  So, we are requesting our two bishops to request this of Cardinal George to reinforce circulation of the FOCA petition.  How about www.StopFreedomofChoice.org originating from the USCCB in order to get the attention of the American Christian public. 

#4. CLOSE DOWN ABORTION CLINICS NATIONWIDE BY FLOODING THEIR SIDEWALKS WITH PRAY-ERS AND COUNSELORS.

This could happen if Cardinal George wanted it to by insisting that every diocesan bishop where abortion clinics are located require their pastors and their clergy make a parish project out of this goal, talked about it from the pulpit on a regular basis, and asked for volunteers.

What’s it going to take for Cardinal George and our clergy to do that?  There is precedence of Catholic Church leadership breaking their silence and crossing that line between espousing moral beliefs and values and taking sides in the political arena.  It takes courage.

To overcome his and their usual reluctance to get involved in politics, let’s examine the example of Jaime Cardinal Sin, Archbishop of Manila, who in 1984 was referred to as the most popular man in the Phillipines. The country was disintegrating under the rule of the well-known tyrant, Ferdinand Marcos, and their traditional democracy was being degraded by a government that made less and less pretense of justice. 

Cardinal Sin constantly criticized the government for human rights abuses, (and of course, none have been worse in the history of mankind than the 50 million babies killed by our own government’s decision in 1973) on which he sent pastoral letters read in every Roman Catholic Church in the Phillipines.  He initially made clear that he did not speak for opposition politicians, but for God.  You see, He was a student of the Bible and after studying the Book of Chronicles, he discovered a parrallel with the grief his own nation was suffering following the murder of their resistance leader, Benigno Aquino, in the account of Israel’s corrupt leaders.  Sin reasoned, “When God wants to punish a people, He gives them unjust rulers, like Marcos.”  He believed then, the answer for the people is to repent, turn away from their views, be converted, and seek God.

Isn’t that kind of what we are feeling today about our new secular government taking office in Washington?

Now, Bishop Farrell and the USCCB could use that tactic to justify an active role in our effort to stop passage of the Freedom of Choice Act before Congress even assembles in January.

Or, even better, in the case of Obama’s fraudulent citizenship, they could do what Cardinal Sin did next.  Until Aquino was murdered, he had been very careful not to marry the Church’s position to the opposition.  When Marcos disgracefully intimidated the Cardinal into supporting his re-election, Sin crossed the line of his self-imposed pledge and fired back in discust, “Sir, I will unite the opposition in order that there may be a fair election.”  Result: with the national unifying power of Cardinal Sin, Corazon Aquino, the popular wife of the slain Benigno, won the election and took office after the remarkable intervention of God himself to overcome the military power of Marcos to maintain office by force.  It’s a fantastic true story that will be posted on my blog in the near future.

 However, with this example, the Bishops don’t need to be defensive about crossing that self-imposed or attorney imposed prohibition of supporting government dissent especially when we have a moral responsibility to disobey illicit law making.

Chuck Suter

 

 

 

 

 

  

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DO YOU KNOW? Series Article #16

WHAT IS GOD’S MESSAGE TO US AS AMERICANS, AS CATHOLICS, AND AS PRO-LIFERS FROM THE ELECTION?

Let’s face it, this Article, by nature of the results of the election, is not a rah! rah! congratulations on a job well done, good and faithful servant.  It’s more like Our Lord’s lesson in Ezekiel 33:7-9, which concludes with: “But if you warn the wicked, trying to turn him from his way, he shall die for his guilt, but you shall save yourself.”  Doesn’t there have to be some question whether we did enough to warn the wicked?

COULD THE CATHOLIC CHURCH HAVE DONE MORE?

Did we as Americans deserve what we got from the election: Barrack Obama, five more anti-life senators, and over a dozen more anti-life pro-choice representatives to our national government?  I believe that answer is a resounding YES because a society who calls upon God for His blessing while permitting the slaughter of 50 million innocent babies deserves a radical extremist community organizer, the devil’s handmaiden of the culture of death, from a corrupt political machine on the south side of Chicago.  Does anyone believe we deserve better?

As Catholics, did we do all God expected us to do?  Could the Catholic Church have done more to save 35 million unborn babies from destruction? Aren’t those two answers NO and YES respectively?   Don’t we, the Catholic Church and all other respect-for-life citizens, now have to find another way to stop the killing before our whole world becomes culture #23 in its history destroyed by God for its decadence?  According to some historians, we’re already more decadent than 16 of them and so, the real question to examine now is:  How long does the United States have? That’s the subject of our next Article.

Were our bishops’ efforts to educate our electorate about their moral obligations in voting sufficient to meet God’s expectations?  If they expected to prevent further deterioration of respect for life in our culture, why didn’t they begin that process immediately following the 2004 election when nearly 50% of our Catholic voters voted democrat (pro-abortion)?  Instead, except for publishing Faithful Citizenship last November, which, as it turns out now did more harm than good, our bishops didn’t get serious about Barrack Obama until five weeks before this election and a major gaffe by Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senator Joe Biden.

DID THE CATHOLIC VOTE MAKE A DIFFERENCE? 

The last New York Times/CBS nationwide poll of Catholic voters before the election showed Obama with a 59% to 31% edge over McCain.  According to newsweek.washingtonpost.com, “Catholic voters ignored the instructions of a group of vocal bishops and delivered 54% of their vote nationwide for Obama.  Hispanic Catholics…voted overwhelmingly for Obama and white Catholics split their vote between the two candidates. The laity reputiated Archbishop Burke’s description of the Democratic Party as a Party of death.”  This, of course is the truth. ”They clearly agree with what the bishops said in Faithful Citizenship‘Church leaders are to avoid endorsing or opposing candidates or telling people how to vote.’”  Should this statement even appear in Faithful Citizenship

Isn’t this the reason why not?  The right-to-life has been a basic value of the Catholic Church since the first century.  Does anyone with an IQ above 50 not know that the Catholic Church and its leaders are expected to oppose any candidate who supports abortion.  The federal government and its IRS acknowledge, notwithstanding their perverted use of the concept of “separation of Chuch and State,” that every religion in the U.S. has a right to publicly express its beliefs and values and can not restrict them from instructing their congregations on which candidates agree with their teaching and which ones don’t, and therefore, what the consequences are if they disobey that teaching?

In fact, for the last five weeks of the campaign, many Catholic bishops specifically opposed Obama because of the extreme nature of his anti-life positions, as they should have.  Our Bishops Farrell and Vann here in Dallas and Fort Worth issued a needed sectarian Joint Statement that stated it is morally impermissible to vote for a pro-choice candidate.  This got the attention of the secular news media.  One of the ABC local news anchors, after reporting this, was heard to accuse the bishops of telling Catholics it’s a mortal sin to vote for Obama as she was jumping up to break for a commercial.  It seems she was willing to say what our bishops were  implying, and should have said, and she was right on target with the truth. Continuing the Newsweek quotes: “Others (bishops) simply repeated what Faithful  Citizenship said, that abortion ‘is not just one issue among many.’   and… also said, ‘As Catholics we are not single-issue voters.’  These are conflicting statements to be sure, but they totally miss the point in the first place.  The truth is that the right-to-life is not even an issue, it’s a human right and therefore encompasses and pre-empts all other rights and issues.  But note the confusion these two statements cause.

There are other examples of ambiguous and conflicting statements in Faithful Citizenship, but those above give us an idea of the lack of clarity, integrity, and cohesiveness of this document and why Catholic voters, and the public at large, were confused about the teaching of the Church when some of our clergy did in fact speak out.  Without on-going unifying, clear, and comprehensive weekly education of our parishioners from the pulpit on issues that affect our daily lives every week of the year and every year of the decade, the Church will never restore its leadership position as the standard for Christian morality in this country.  And, could it be that is one of the messages God is sending to us, the laity, and especially our  clergy, with the results of this election?    

To make a difference, the Catholic Church would have to have been on a united pro-life Church-wide crusade since 2004 to educate our people, especially Hispanics, on God’s and the Church’s teaching on the respect-for-life issues, their pre-eminence, and the impact to a Catholic’s eternal salvation for violating that teaching as was so eloquently explained by Bishop Finn in an election eve press interview.  Weren’t too many of our bishops around the country in 2004, too concerned, as they are now, with the political correctness of pandering to the moral relativist lifestyle of many of their parishioners, in order to unite with those who would lead such a crusade for the salvation of their parishioners?  That’s why Faithful Citizenship, with diametrically opposing statements, could be and was used against us in this election.  There was no unity among our clergy then and their is none now, so our Church’s testimony against FOCA will likely be discounted because of it.  

SHOULD THE CHURCH NOW UNITE BEHIND THE NEW GOVERNMENT?

Is God’s message to us that we got what we deserve?  Yes, but it certainly is much more.  Now, of course, the cry from the democrats is and will consistently be “Bi-Partisanship.”  We all have to unite behind the new uniter, Barrack Obama.   And the first one to say it on November 5th was John McCain.  Is that God’s message to us?  Of course not!  Does God want us to unite behind Obama’s pledge to Planned Parenthood to pass the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA)?   I don’t think so and that answer includes more of the American population than just Catholics.  God’s message to all Christians is and always has been to automatically reject any and all illicit laws, that it is our responsibility to disobey them, and actively seek to beat, change or eliminate them.  Therefore, many Catholics, especially pro-lifers, will not be willing to give up our moral beliefs and values to support Barrack Obama’s immoral secular government that we know to be founded on lies and deceit.  Does anyone believe these liberal politicians who will now be taking over our government will ever abandon their pro-abortion anti-life base unless the public or the courts force them to?

After gaining power with lies, deceit, personal attacks, denial of facts and truth, there are two major tenants of liberal ideology to maintain that power: 1) Proclaim the need for tolerance, but give no quarter, and 2) proclaim the need for bi-partisanship, but unite with our political opposition only on our own liberal premise.   These are their major weapons because they can’t maintain their power with their liberal socialistic ideas.  Do you remember Obama saying during the campaign that infanticide of a baby who survived an abortion was necessary in order to avoid undermining Roe v Wade which still allows the mother her right-to-choose.  He gives no quarter.  How does one have that kind of a cold, heartless disrespect for life unless he has serious moral flaws in his character that disable his judgment and performance in making all other decisions? 

BARRACK OBAMA CONDUCTS HIMSELF AS AN ENEMY OF GOD.

How will he reconcile his morally deficient beliefs and his pledge to Planned Parenthood on passage of the Freedom of Choice Act with the huge number of Americans, including Blacks and Hispanics who support the morally conservative victories of the Marriage Amendment in the three states of California, Florida, and Arizona where Christians had a great day.  Shouldn’t Obama and his new liberal establishment unite with us 57 million Republican voters on FOCA now and show their good faith to their call for bi-partisanship?  There is no way Christians can accept his premise for the passage of that law, so, shouldn’t our Church start uniting now to fight it.

SO, WHAT DOES GOD EXPECT OF HIS CHURCH NOW?

1) Give up, accept the new government, wait for the next election, & prayer?

2) Support the new president and his government and prayer? 

3) Continue our political correctness as in the past and prayer? 

4) Prayer and dissent — mobilize our Church to accomplish two goals:  

     a) Prevent the passage of the Freedom of Choice Act. 

     b) Close down the abortion clinics by saturating them with sidewalk  

         prayers and counselors.

Anyone of the first three will simply affirm the actions of the people we must oppose to prevent the passage of FOCA.  Number 4 is the only one that has a chance.  There will be thousands of subtle liberal maneuvers and precedural schemes behind the scenes by the new administration to quietly get their way.  For example, we will wake up one day a month from now or so and find that two or three of the three senate races subject to recounts will end up stolen by the democrats in order to secure a filibuster-proof majority.  We have already lost the fourth one that existed on election day.  They have to know that we know they will cheat, lie, and deceive.

It will probably be impossible for them to achieve passage of the Freedom of Choice Act in this manner, especially if the Catholic Church and all other Christian organizations begin immediately to oppose that  legislation even before Obama takes office.  Silence now will be deadly because that’s exactly what they are watching for to plan their strategy for quick passage of that bill to fulfill his pledge.  Obama’s Saul Alinsky training in black liberation theology combined with the Pelosi/Reid most leftist liberal congressional leadership ever will require vastly higher levels of activism by Christian conservatives than we’ve been accustomed to in the past.  Our great progress on restricting abortion over the last 35 years that has brought us to the brink of total success is over and totally lost if FOCA becomes law.  We must now revert to an all out defensive posture to prevent its passage.  It means our pro-lifers need visible and active support from our clergy at the pulpits to get much larger numbers of pray-ers out in front of the abortion clinics during every daily killing hour. 

It means, to be credible, our bishops at the USCCB must unite on a plan to lead and mobilize all Catholics and other Americans who want to acomplish this same goal.  We can’t have some of our bishops supporting us at the clinics by helping us recruit more people in our parishes and other bishops still maintaining their politically correct relationships with liberals in government when it comes to the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA).  Obama has to know immediately, before inauguration, that the Catholic Church is united in unalterable opposition to FOCA and there is no compromise position regardless of the fact that 54% of our so called “Catholic” voters voted for him.  He needs to be informed that the percentage of practicing Catholics who voted pro-life in past elections has been 12 to 15% higher than the national average, which  includes nominal Catholics, some of whom don’t attend church, don’t practice the  sacraments, and others who have actually excommunicated themselves because they voted pro-choice in the past and received communion without confession.  So, if the national Catholic pro-life vote this year was 46%, the practicing Catholic pro-life vote was about 60%.  He also needs to be reminded that over 70% of the American public reject abortion on demand as it is practiced today. 

Here’s what Quin Hillyer, a respected columnist for American Spectator, says in his ”Saul Alinsky Takes the White House” on 11/06/08:

“These new Alinskyites…will not let us play by the same rules under which conservstives recovered from those earlier debacles.  They will try to drastically tilt the playing field,…and to rig the process to make it next to impossible for the political right, or Republicans, to recover. 

“Watch for an assault on the filibuster itself…how they use as precedent the GOP ‘nuclear/constitutional option’…except instead of just using it for judges, watch them use it against all filibusters. 

“Watch a cheerleading establishment media…as a veritable Fifth Column — actually back these lefty maneuvers.  The filibuster…as a vestige of Southern ‘massive resistance’ to integration…is now being used for massive resistance to the first black president, which invalidates it (suddenly) as a legitimate tool.

“Watch the left use these tactics and others to pass even more liberalized voting laws–an open invitation to even more fraud that is more creative, easier to hide, and less changeable in court.

“Watch what Michael Barone called Obama ‘thugocracy’ use of the Justice Department to stifle dissent….Likewise, anybody who peacefully protests abortion clinics or the use of state-sponsored racial quotas will be charged with a civil rights violation.  And the accused won’t be able to look to the Supreme Court for help: Anthony Kennedy’s ‘evolving standards’ of justice will evolve to match the new zeitgeist (spirit of the age), providing a 5-4 majority for the administration.

“And, only when the time is right and the ground (or air) is well prepared, will come the grand-daddy of all fights, the re-enactment of the misnamed ‘Fairness Doctrine.’“   This refers to the expected Fifth Column attack on conservative talk radio or “hate radio” as they already call it.  If that carries,  our major voice of dissent against liberal government will be gone.

What are the chances our Catholic leadership will recognize the deteriating conditions that exist now for Christian freedoms in the United States, give up their political correctness relationships for a united Church leadership to defeat FOCA?  Surely, they know a good politically incorrect lobbist in Washington who can influence lawmakers on the  Christian position.

If not, then God’s message to us probably more closely resembles the scenario in our next Article #17.

 

 

DO YOU KNOW? Series Article #15

DID WE DO ALL GOD EXPECTED US TO DO?

WHAT DO WE DESERVE TO REAP FROM THIS ELECTION?

Could we, the Catholic Church, have done more to insure the safety of the lives of 35 million babies yet to be conceived in the next 25 to 30 years before the next opportunity comes along?

Or will God even put up with another 25 years of this desecration of His moral law before fulfilling the prophecies of Revelation?

What is the measure of the Church’s performance over the life of this political campaign of nearly two years?  Will it only be the election results?

Were the Bishop’s efforts to educate our electorate about their moral obligations in voting sufficient to get the Church’s desired results? 

Did the turnout of pro-life Catholic voters or lack thereof make a significant difference in the election of pro-life candidates?

On November 5th, will it all have been enough to please God and achieve the results He expects of us in battling the evil forces of the devil?

Does a society who calls upon God for His blessings while permitting the slaughter of innocent babies in the womb deserve a pro-life president?

If the radical community organizer, the devil’s handmaiden of the culture of death from Mayor Daley’s corrupt Chicago political machine, Barrack Obama, wins the election, have we not deserved that result?

IS GOD’S NATURAL LAW AT WORK IN THIS ELECTION?

If there ever is a granddaddy of presidential elections between a candidate representing the Culture Of Life and a candidate representing the Culture Of Death, this one is it.  John McCain, although not as conservative in some of his amoral positions as many of us would prefer, is a man of high character, honesty, and integrity, of battle tested loyalty to his God and country for decades, and one of the most vociferously declared pro-life politicians in our country.  When Rick Warren asked him when a baby has human rights, he answered unhesitatingly with four words in one second,  “At the moment of conception.”  He strongly proclaimed to Warren, “I have a 25 year pro-life record in Congress…and as president of the U.S.  I will be a pro-life president and this presidency will have pro-life policies.”  If he and Sarah Palin win, we could have a pro-life president for the next sixteen years.

Barrack Obama, in contrast, is living a charade in which his audience has to guess who he is, where he came from, what he believes, who his associates, friends and mentors are, and what they think of him.  Are we entirely sure he is an American citizen?  Can we trust him that that record isn’t fabricated?  In this charade the audience never really gets the answers and over the course of the campaign, the answers they get, though very disturbing like Reverend Wright, Bill Ayres, Rezko, Galidi, Farrakhan, the Black Muslims etc., are never investigated by the biased collaborating secular media, who have long since ignored or hidden the truth, documentation and the facts.  In addition, have we ever seen or heard about an endorsement from any of his contacts who is a person of character during those years after graduation in New York and Chicago, including his time in the Illinois state or United States senate? Obama spent most of his adult life, 25 years, in Chicago politics.

None of this should be a surprise to anyone who has read about his mixed race parents, his childhood struggle for race identity, his elementary education in muslim schools in Indonesia, and his bazaar decision to become a community organizer on the south side of Chicago after graduating with a law degree from Columbia that could place him with any top law firm in the country on his terms.  Of course, his insatiable quest for money and introduction to Mayor Daley’s political money-making machine soon taught him that corruption is a faster path to wealth than a practicing rookie lawyer.

He must be the most anti-life pro-abortion liberal politician ever in our history, since none have ever declared in public, as Obama has when it comes to a woman’s right-to-choose, that “…this election is not just about playing defense, it’s also about playing offense, not just about defending what is, but it’s about creating what might be in this country.  On this fundamental issue, I will not yield and Planned Parenthood will not yield.”  But, the majority of the voting public has never heard this and can you imagine that anyone in the media bothered to ask Planned Parenthood when Obama became their spokesman?

He made no pretense during the primaries about his ideology on respect for life when he said, …”if my daughters make a mistake, I wouldn’t want them punished with a baby.”  When one analyzes his election campaign, you see Obama and his campaign directors are living a lie.  We all know he’s following a script for everything he says that simply panders to his base and/or deceives unsuspecting independents and moderates.  That’s why he wouldn’t do townhall style debates with McCain.  In those, he’d have to think on his feet and answer questions avoided in scripted debates.  Example: when Rick Warren asked Obama when a baby has human rights, his answer took a paragraph of words that finally ended after much uncertainty with: “…answering that question with specificity is…ah…is…ah… ah…above my pay grade.” That’s a lie!  The truthful answer in his head was, “Science now knows it’s at conception, but I can’t tell you that, Rick, because I’d upset my Planned Parenthood base.”

Three times Obama defended infanticide on babies who survive abortion.  Have you heard of anyone in or out of politics ever defend or support this ruthless ideology and yet his media accomplices give him a pass on this major defect in his character?  It’s the on-going conspiracy between the secular media and the democrat party that has been in existence for decades based on lies and deception.  The reason we’ve had three Republican presidents out of the last four despite this is because 60% of the electorate identify themselves as either very conservative or somewhat conservative and only 36% very liberal and somewhat liberal.  Two percent call themselves moderate and 5% didn’t answer the poll.  Election fraud this year may put them over the top for a second time since 1980.

Barrack Obama may someday receive God’s redeeming grace, but until that happens and manifests itself, the best we should do for him is prayer, not elect him president.

God’s natural law is working overtime by now, after nearly two years of deceit and cover up, to prove once again the inability of powerful, highly motivated professionals, whether men or women, to hold together a conspiracy based on a lie.  We learned that during Watergate.  President Nixon’s coverup conspiracy lasted less than a month before his hold on office was doomed.  We have to hope that, by now, even though no one in the campaign will likely give it away before next Tuesday, that enough of our voting public has already discerned Obama’s deceptive plot against all of us, not just unborn babies.  

So, the bottom line question on November 5th, just three days from now, whether we have won or lost, will be:  What is God’s message to us?   That’s because if Barrack Obama becomes president of the United States, the pro-life lifestyle for Christians, especially Catholics and their Church in America, will surely change drastically.  Many of us will not be willing to give up our moral beliefs and values to support an immoral secular government we know to be a lie.

And perhaps the leadership of our Catholic Church will finally realize it’s time to abandon their political correctness and start living their faith when it comes to letting the world know the teaching of Jesus Christ on the respect for life, ending their silence from the pulpit on educating our parishioners, and actively recruiting prayers in front of the abortion clinics. 

 

 

 

DO YOU KNOW? Series Article #14

 

DO YOU KNOW THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS OUR NATION’S ONLY HOPE TO PREVENT AN OBAMA PRESIDENCY?

FINALLY, AN END TO CHURCH SILENCE!

Justin Cardinal Rigali is Chairman of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishiops’ Committee on Pro-Life Activities.  He finally broke our Catholic leadership’s silence with a section of his statement on Respect Life Sunday regarding the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA):  He said:

“Today, we face the threat of a federal bill that, if enacted, would obliterate all gains of the past 35 years and cause the abortion rate to skyrocket. The ‘Freedom of Choice Act’ has many Congressional sponsors, some of whom have pledged to act swiftly to help enact this proposed legislation when Congress reconvenes in January.

“FOCA establishes abortion as a ‘fundamental right’ throughout the nine months of pregnancy, and forbids any law or policy that could ’interfere’ with that right or ‘discriminate’ against it in public funding and programs.

“If FOCA became law, hundreds of reasonable, widely supported, and constitutionally sound abortion regulations now in place would be invalidated. 

“Gone would be laws providing for informed consent, and parental consent or notification in the case of minors.

“Laws protecting women from unsafe abortion clinics and from abortion practioners who are not physicians would be overridden. 

“Restrictions on partial-birth abortions and other late term abortions would be eliminated. 

“FOCA would knock down laws protecting the conscience rights of nurses, doctors, and hospitals with moral objections to abortion, and force taxpayers to fund abortions throughout the U.S.”

“We cannot allow this to happen.  We cannot tolerate an even greater loss of innocent human lives… We look forward to the day when these counseling services are no longer needed, when every child is welcomed in life and protected in law.  If FOCA is enacted, however, that day may recede into the very distant future.”

Notice, there is no reference to the fact that Barrack Obama, on July 28th, 2008, in a speech to Planned Parenethood, told them his first act as president would be to enact FOCA.  Following is our email to Cardinal Rigali on October 5th, 2008: 

TO: Justin Cardinal Rigali

      Chairman, USCCB Committee on Pro-Life Activities

Dear Cardinal Rigali,

As a Parish Pro-Life Advocate for the last ten years, I’m one of your sidewalk counselors at an abortion clinic here where we are currently holding the 40 Days For Life prayer vigil and working to maximize our Catholic pro-life vote in this year’s election.

Because of Bishop Farrell’s and Bishop Vann’s leadership here in the Dallas and Ft. Worth dioceses in preparing and educating our parishioners for this election through their Catholic Pro-Life Committees and Knights of Columbus organizations, we believe we will turnout a Catholic pro-life vote much higher than the national average of about 50% that voted in the last four presidential elections.  

Doesn’t just a 50% pro-life vote indicate there is a huge gap between what our Church teaches on our moral obligations for voting and what some of our parishioners know and believe about our moral obligations? 

Texas will vote pro-life anyway even without help here, but what about the rest of the nation or just nine or ten swing states?  We have email addresses for 42 diocesan bishops ready to go in 11 swing states for this message, Your Eminence, but it would carry tons of more clout coming from you as Chairman of USCCB Pro-Life Activities.

What inspired me to write this email to you to spread the word about the election efforts Bishops Farrell and Vann have undertaken is your STATEMENT FOR RESPECT LIFE SUNDAY, and specifically the disturbing information you provide there about FOCA.  And, isn’t the knowledge that Barrack Obama told Planned Parenthood on 7/28/08 that enacting FOCA would be his first action after his inauguration just as important to influence Catholic voters as the consequences of FOCA itself?  See attachment #2, which includes his anti-life record.

The objective of this, then, Your Eminence, is to ask you, as Chairman of the USCCB’s Pro-Life Activities, to be a catalyst in bringing the voting power of Catholics being Catholic instead of being political to preventing the disaster you describe by making sure those four powerful vote changers below are being disseminated in at least those 42 dioceses of the major swing states through homilies and bulletin stuffers.  See attachment #1 for an example of a concise flyer that eliminates non-essentials.

Your Eminence, those three paragraphs in your statement, along with the knowledge of the other three below, if made a part of every Catholic voter’s well-formed conscience, we believe could change the hearts and minds of enough of our Catholic voters who voted pro-choice last time to raise that pro-life 50% to 70% and win this election for our pro-life candidates for president and the senate where it matters the most to reverse Roe v Wade and prevent the passage of FOCA.  In Dallas, we don’t believe Faithful Citizenship has sufficient clarity, brievity, and persuavive power to be massively effective.

Short of an attack by Israel on Iran’s nuclear facilities, isn’t getting a larger percentage of the Catholic vote the only event that can change the dynamics of this race to prevent your warning from becoming reality?  And, you’re the first member of our leadership to mention this one of these four most important pieces of information our voters need to know in order to influence the way they vote without explicitly telling them how to vote.

1)  What’s at stake in this election, that being about 35 million unborn babies over 30 years.

2)  The clear Church teaching about the superior moral equivalence of abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell destruction, human cloning, and homosexual marriage, which eliminates all other issues this year.

3)  The sinful consequences of violating that teaching, which are never clearly identified and of which many of those Catholic pro-choice voters are not aware or intentionally ignore.

4)  The drastic consequences of FOCA to pro-life progress in your statement along with the candidates’ positions on the life issues.  

Please visit our Blogsite, www.viewsfromthepews.wordpress.com, Articles #3 through #10 and Article #13 for a suggested diocesan plan and background on the practicality of this stratgy.

Your Eminence, isn’t this election the opportunity the Holy Spirit is presenting all Catholics to once again be Catholic in order to re-cultivate our Catholic identity in this country as exhorted to us by our Pope last April, and begin to restore our Church’s leadership as the standard of morality in the United States?

Because of Barrack Obama’s extreme anti-life radicalism, isn’t it time for our Catholic Church leadership at USCCB to require our diocesan bishops and pastors to end their silence from the pulpit about this election, FOCA, and the sinful consequences of voting for anti-life candidates?  Pro-lifers are doing it, but, it means 1000% more and covers millions more of our voters when it comes from the pulpit on Sunday.

Is this your last chance to avoid waking up on November 5th to discover that you didn’t do all you could to prevent the most anti-life candidate for president in our history, a thug of Mayor Daley’s Chicago political machine, from becoming president?  November 5th is too late to contemplate that question.  Catholics voting as a block in America would tell the entire world that the Pope inspired an upset victory for Right-to-Life.

God give you courage, wisdom, and peace, Your Eminence.

IS IT A MORTAL SIN TO VOTE FOR ANTI-LIFE PRO-ABORTION POLITICIANS?  

Section #1857 in the Catechism of the Catholic Church states: 

“For a sin to be mortal, three conditions must together be met: Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent.

“Unintentional ignorance can diminish or even remove the imputability of a grave offense.  But no one is deemed to be ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are written in the conscience of every man.”

The Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued the document Declaration on Procured Abortion on November 18th 1974.  Paragraph 22 states:

“…man can never obey a law which is in itself immoral, and such is the case of a law which would admit in principle the liceity of abortion.  Nor can he take part in a propaganda campaign in favor of such a law, or vote for it.”

Any politician who votes for an abortion law is a formal accomplice to that law and any citizen who votes for that politician is a material accomplice to the abortions which will ensue from the election of that pro-death politician.  Material cooperation in the evil of abortion is a mortal sin.

Many who call themselves Catholic support the legalized murder of unborn children.  They continually reject the Church’s immutable and constant teaching throughout her 2000 years of history that abortion is a grave sin against God.  As we see is section 62c of Pope John Paul II’s The Gospel of Life, they cannot claim invincible ignorance of the intrinsic evil of pre-natal murder:

“I declare that direct abortion…always constitutes a grave moral disorder, since it is the deliberate killing of an innocent human being. …No circumstance, no purpose, no law whatsoever can ever make licit an act which is intrinsically illicit, since it is contrary to the law of God which is written in every human heart, knowable by reason itself and proclaimed by the Church.”

To say that a pro-abortion candidate’s stance on other issues, such as war, capital punishment, racism, social justice for the poor and hungry, the environment, immigration, etc. provide a morally equivalent reason for voting for him is absolutely false.   These are not always intrinsically evil and do not always result in the death of innocent human beings. The 1998 American Bishops’ “Living the Gospel of Life,” in section 23, states:

“Any politics of human dignity must seriously address issues of racism, poverty, hunger, employment, education, housing, and health care.  Therefore, Catholics should eagerly involve themselves as advocates for the weak and marginalized in all these areas…But being ‘right’ in such matters can never excuse a wrong choice regarding attacks on innocent human life.”   (Italics in original.)

In the current presidential election, we have an unmistakably clear choice between a staunch pro-life candidate, Republican John McCain, and a virulently anti-life pro-abortion candidate, democrat Barrack Obama, whose rabid support of pre-natal murder disqualifies him from holding any public office.  Catholics, no matter what their party affiliation, cannot in good conscience vote for Obama.  To do so is to put their immortal souls in grave danger.

 

 

DO YOU KNOW ? Series Article #13

DO YOU KNOW THE TERRIBLE CONSEQUENCES TO   RIGHT-TO-LIFE FROM AN ANTI-LIFE OBAMA PRESIDENCY?

A.  Barrack Obama’s Anti-life Record:

  1. As an Illinois senator, Obama voted three times against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, enacted to protect babies who survive an abortion attempt, and actually spoke against it on the Senate floor.   This occurred after the U.S. Senate voted 98 to 0 in favor of this legislation in order to prevent infanticde, which is the result if this act is not enforced.

  2. Obama voted against the Ban on Partial Birth Abortion, a late term abortion where the baby’s skull has to be stabbed with scissors in the birth canal to be legal.  The brains can then be legally sucked out of the skull to painfully end its life & ease passage of the still shaking baby’s body into a pan.

  3. When Congress was voting to ban partial birth abortion, Michelle Obama was signing fundraising letters pledging that, if elected, Barrack would be “tireless” in keeping legal this ” legitimate medical procedure.”

  4. And when the Supreme Court upheld the congressional ban on this barbaric procedure, Barrack denounced the court for denying “equal rights for women.”  He’s also famous for his quote that he doesn’t want his young daughters to be “punished with a baby” just because they make a mistake with some boyfriend.  Now there’s a caring father for you.

  5. Obama has an A+ report card with the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) and Planned Parenthood.

  6. Obama has a rating of ZERO from the National Right to Life Committee and is considered the most pro-abortion, anti-life member of the U.S. Senate in its history.  

  7. On July 28, 2007, Senator Obama vowed before a Planned Parenthood conference that his first act as president would be to sign the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA), which would codify Roe v Wade into law and guarantee a woman’s right to choose in all 50 states.      

  8. Finally, when asked by Rick Warren on his faith based TV Forum, “When does a baby get human rights?” Obama, after some hesitation replied “….the answer to that is above my pay grade.”  Warren purposely had planned no follow ups due to time constraints, but this ocassion should have been an exception to ask: “If you’re that uncertain about when life begins, and you won’t accept our present knowledge that life begins at conception, then, wouldn’t a wise and thoughtful person oppose abortion until you thought theology and science had the answer?”  Of course not, that’s not politically correct to my base of voters is the truth of his logically vacant answer.  How can this man be a nominee for president of the U.S. is a logical question for all to ask?                                                               

B.  What are the consequences to the Right-To-Life? 

If Barrack Obama wins this year’s election to become president it will almost certainly mean that the democrats will also gain enough new senate seats to control the necessary 60 votes to overcome a filibuster in the senate and their majority in the house will just get bigger. There would be no stopping the following from becoming a reality:

1.   The Freedom of Choice Act (Foca) would become law  probably in the first session of Congress in 2009.  Much of the rest below takes place automatically immediately.

2.   The Ban on Partial Birth Abortion would be repealed.

3.   All common sense laws, state and federal, of Parental Notification or Consent for a child under 18 to obtain an abortion would be overturned.

4.   Conscience Protection laws in the medical profession to allow doctors and staff to refrain from participating in abortions, mercy killing, euthanasia, etc. without losing their jobs would be at risk.

5.   Laws forcing abortionists to inform their abortion patients of the risks of an abortion and the options available to them before obtaining consent, give them prior access to sonograms of their babies in the womb, permit state mandated waiting periods and regulations for women’s health would be at risk and likely overturned.

6.   Hundreds of state laws that protect women, parents, children, and health care workers in the Right-To-Life industry; which includes life in the womb, embryonic stem cell research, human cloning, preservation of life in old age from the mercy killers and assisted suiciders; would be obliterated.

7.  It’s likely at least two liberal Supreme Court justices, Ginsberg and Stevens, will resign following the court’s session ending in June 2009 and would be replaced by two more liberal justices for the next 30 years.  Thus, the legal status quo on Roe vs Wade will be maintained.

8.  Therefore, another 35 million or more abortions will murder kids in the womb and our neutral 2.1 birth rate will begin to decline.

As pointed out in Article #3, if Catholic voters are educated on the information and data in this blog, especially Articles #3–#7, and this Article #13, we believe enough of them who previously voted pro-choice (anti-life) and some of those who didn’t vote will vote pro-life this year, keep the anti-life monster above from becoming president, and save the lives of 30 to 40 million unborn babies over decades to come.

How could any Catholic, including that 70 to 80% of our democrat clergy, who know and understand the factual information and data in this blog, not VOTE PRO-LIFE on November 4th?  There’s still time to get this word out in enough swing states to make a difference if enough God-fearing Catholic Diocesan Bishops put there mind to it.  The letter below is designed to help you do that, but compose your own to customize it to your bishop.

On Sunday, August 24, 2008, Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi appeared on Meet The Press.  She literally made a fool of herself trying to explain how the “doctors” of the Church do not tell us when life begins.  Thanks to Bishop Farrell, our Bishop here in the Dallas diocese, Cardinal Justin Rigali, Chairman of the U.S. Bishops’ Committee for Pro-life Activities, and Bishop William Lori, Chairman of the Bishops’ on Doctrine issued a statement refuting Pelosi’s remarks and setting the record straight on the authentic teaching of the Church against abortion from the moment of conception on.

Bishop Farrell not only initiated that response by asking for it, but he also immediately empowered his Catholic Pro-Life  Committee organization to educate our Dallas Catholic voters on the Church’s teaching on the life issues in anticipation of their voting in the November election, a move we had been hoping for since last April.  We will cover this in more detail in a later Article, but suffice it to say we are asking him to be the signator on the letter below or his revision of it.

 

 A LAYMAN’S EMAIL TO CATHOLIC DIOCESAN BISHOPS NATIONWIDE!

Dear Bishop____________________________,

In the last four presidential elections, between 46 and 54% of all Catholic voters voted for anti-life (pro-choice) candidates.  That consistency appears to us to mean that there is a large gap between what a major percentage of our Catholics know and believe and what the Catholic Church teaches, at least about the life issues, moral equivalence, and the consequences of violating that teaching while voting in elections.  Our thanks to you if you and your Pastors are educating your parishioners so that they are well-informed and encouraged to vote pro-life.

Your Excellency, this year’s election is particularly critical because of the very real possibility that Barrack Obama will become president and enough anti-life (pro-choice) senators will be elected to provide the 60 senator majority to break a filibuster of Supreme Court nominees, thus allowing one or two new liberal justices on the court resulting in another 35 million unborn babies to die from abortions over the next 30 years or so.  Do you believe your parishioners all are aware of these high stakes in this election?  History indicates many of them aren’t.   Can you let them go to the polls without this knowledge?

In addition, will you be meeting your moral responsibility to inform your flock if 50% are not aware of the Church’s teaching on abortion, human cloning, euthanasia, destruction of embryonic stem cells, and same-sex marriage; the superior moral equivalence of these issues, and the positions of the candidates on these issues when they go to the polls?

Our Church clergy have been silent on the potential disaster to our pro-life values if Obama becomes president.  Now, we know, Your Excellency, that we aren’t permitted to tell parishioners for whom to vote, but don’t we want them to be informed and encouraged to “Vote Pro-Life” through bulletin stuffers and clergy homilies as we have in the past?  Even the government permits the Church to express its pro-life values to our people.

Our K of C Supreme Knight, Carl Anderson, in his 2008 report acknowledges “Catholics often confront a dilemma in deciding how to vote.” Then he asks: “Can we support a candidate who may be attractive for many reasons but who supports abortion? ….the Supreme Court Roe v Wade decision is not just another political issue; it is in reality a legal regime that has resulted in more than 40 million (actually 50 million) deaths.  What political issue could possibly outweigh this human devastation?” he asks!  Wouldn’t you agree,  Excellency, that education is needed as well on the concept of moral equivalence to resolve that dilemma?

On our blog, www.viewsfromthepews.wordpress.com, please review Articles #3 through #7 and #13.  Then, allow your parish pro-life ministries to use Article #5a as a replacement bulletin stuffer or pass out because it clearly identifies the high stakes of this election (35 million babies) and the consequences for violating Church teaching which are missing from Faithful Citizenship.  If you are inclined to favor Obama for president, please rethink the disaster that could be for those babies, the negative consequences it could be to the right-to-life progress of the last eight years, and then ask yourself: “How would Jesus vote if He were here, and how does He expect me, as the shepherd of thousands of His flock, to vote in November?”

May God give you courage and wisdom, Excellency.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DO YOU KNOW? Series Article #12

 

PLAN B BELIEFS & VALUES, STRATEGIES,  ACTION STEPS, PEOPLE & TIMING

4)  BELIEFS AND VALUES

a)  We believe that many if not most of our Catholic parishioners are not adequately informed to meet their moral obligations in voting in this fall’s election.

b)  We believe that there is a large gap between what the Catholic Church teaches and what most Catholics know and believe about our faith and specifically about the life issues of abortion, euthanasia, destruction of embyronic stem cells, human cloning, and the homosexual issue of same-sex unions.

c)  We believe that most Catholics of voter age are not educated on the superior moral equivalence of these issues to all others and that they don’t know the consequences of violating the Church’s teaching for voting for pro-choice candidates.

d)  We believe that most Catholic voters are not aware of the high stakes in this election for approximately 35 million unborn babies over the next 30 to 40 years because of the replacement of justices on the Supreme Court during the next president’s term.

e)  We believe, if all Catholic voters who didn’t vote in previous elections and those who voted pro-choice for any reason are educated on the above factors, that enough of them will vote pro-life to make the difference to elect the pro-life president and enough pro-life senators to prevent the filibuster of pro-life Supreme Court justices in the next term.

f)  We believe 70 to 80% of our Catholic Bishops are democrats, but because of the blatant anti-life nature of this year’s democrat presidential candidate, Barrack Obama, many of them should and will be more open to this plan and actually vote pro-life on November 4th.  See Article #13 for details on his voting record.

5)  STRATEGIES

a)  First, obtain your Bishop’s leadership and participation if possible but do the plan without him if he rejects it.

b)  Follow all Church rules during implementation, but use your legal rights to get the job done.

c)  Parish Pro-Life Coordinators or members of its pro-life ministry, should act as independent individuals if forced to implement this plan without the permission of your bishop or pastor. 

c)  In order to be most effective, limit activity to parishes with pro-life pastors and/or clergy.

d)  Use our www.viewsfromthepews.wordpress.com blog to educate both clergy and laity.

e)  Refer to Father Pavone’s Priests for Life website for help, advise, education, and material.

f)  Stay strong, committed, and focused on your goal of informing as many Catholics as possible of the Church’s teaching.

 

6)  ACTION STEPS, PEOPLE, AND TIMING

According to our Church’s teaching, there is only one action step all Catholic voters must make to be morally correct when voting on November 4th, 2008. That is:

VOTE PRO-LIFE!

OR DON’T VOTE AT ALL FOR PRESIDENT & SENATOR!

What are the consequences if, as a Catholic voter, you vote for an ANTI-LIFE (Pro-Choice) CANDIDATE for president and/or senator for any reason?  There are three consequences:

1.  You commit a grave sin…

2.  You must receive the Sacrament of Penance before receiving Holy Communion.

3.  35 million unborn babies could die from abortion.

That is the bottom line of this plan.  Our job, as laity, is to deliver that message to as many Catholic voters as we can before the election.  All of the knowledge, data, and information on this blog is here to explain the WHYs, HOWs, WHATs, WHENs, WHEREs and WHOs that justify the moral necessity of that action above and the consequences for violating it.  There are many ways to accomplish this.  If you have one, then do it your way.  The action steps below are just a detailed suggestion of how we are doing it here in Dallas.

a)  Show this plan or your revisions of it, and this Blog’s address, www.viewsfromthepews.wordpress.com, to your Bishop, including the replacement flyer for “Faithful Citizenship,” ask him for his leadership on your plan, permission to use our flyer, and his engagement of his clergy to support the work your group will do to implement it.

b)  If he says no, respectfully disagree with his desire to remain politically correct, and inform him that you will implement the plan yourselves legally on the sidewalks and in the parking lots.  Use and show him the Priests for Life attorney’s, Bopp & Bostrom’s, legal opinion in Fr. Pavone’s book, “Ending Abortion.” They simply say that “churches not only may permit campaign statements to be distributed in their parking lots, they cannot prohibit such distributions because parking lots are open to the public.”  See the complete text in the footnote below this plan and copy it.*

c)  Identify the pastors and priests in your diocese who will support our cause and preach your message from the pulpit and allow you to distribute the politically correct flyer in Article #5a of this blog, the wording of which was reviewed and revised by one of our pro-life priests for accuracy to Church teaching. 

You may obtain two additional copy-ready one page two-sided flyers or bulletin stuffers by emailing chuck.suter@sbcglobal.net and requesting them.  They will be emailed to you on a Word document attachment. These are politically incorrect because one contains a four color picture of the aborted baby, Malachi, and his story.  The other contains a four color picture of a smiling live baby.  Both refer to the 35 million unborn babies at stake in this election and also the life positions of the candidates. To control reproduction cost, just print black & white copies.

d)  Regardless of the attitude of your bishop, you may find pastors who will follow the bishop’s directives and pastors who will not follow the bishop’s wishes.  For that reason, meet with your pastor and clarify the following:

   –Will he allow our flyer replacement for “Faithful Citizenship,” to be a bulletin stuffer or pass out at all the masses on one weekend, and/or will he cover the Church’s teaching in a homily?

   –If not, be sure to respectfully explain your and the Church’s legal rights to pass out flyers and use signs or banners on the sidewalks and parking lots.  Use the same legal opinion referred to above.  Then, clarify that you don’t need his permission.  Alert the pastor that Catholics for Obama groups may be on his sidewalks anyway passing out their “Vote for Obama” material.

   –Clarify respectfully whether your and your parish’s pro-life members will be disbanded if you do this project against his wishes or the bishop’s wishes.  Accept his answer and if it’s yes, then you and your team have three choices: 

1. Do what he permits you to do, which may be nothing. 

2. Work the sidewalks and parking lots of another parish and have that team work your parish. 

3. Recognize that it’s time to challenge our clergy, display our pro-life commitment and “be martyrs” for the lives of unborn babies, and let them know that we see our ministry as just as an important calling for us as his vocation to the priesthood is for him.  It may make him a better priest from that day forward, which is the opportunity our Pope is asking Catholic laity to be looking for.

   –Before you leave, you can respectfully askan objecting pastor how he thinks Jesus would vote in the election? and/or will Jesus be pleased with your (the priest’s) vote?  How good are you at always practicing Christ’s love for the sinner as a person while showing displeasure for the person’s sinful actions? 

As disciples of Jesus in the fight for life in the womb, we have a responsibility to God and to our pastors to engage them about their silence on these issues.  If we, the laity, don’t do it, our bishops and priests have no sense of accountability for their “do nothing” attitudes toward abortion and all other orthodox Church teaching that most of them are failing to address. 

e)  Email this blog address to all the Pro-Life Parish coordinators in your diocese, ask them to read Articles #3 through #7 and #10 through #13 and copy off this Plan in Articles #11 and #12. 

f)  Recruit as many as you can to follow these action steps, including the meeting with their pastor.  Form teams of three or four for each weekend mass at each parish for distribution of flyers if a bulletin stuffer is not allowed. 

g)  Don’t forget to meet with your Bishop if possible unless you already know his position and attitude on the election.

h)  If the Bishop will allow our Article #5a flyer, or one of the others emailed to you, in place of the “Faithful Citizenship” one page flyer, then have the teams stuff bulletins or pass them out inside the churches sometime in October. 

i)  If the Bishop insists on the “Faithful Citizenship” flyer, which does not accomplish the desired result of teaching consequences of voting anti-life (pro-choice) or the concept of moral equivalence, and the pastor won’t do a satisfactory homily on the Church’s teaching about elections, then have the teams pass out one of the flyers emailed to you outside the churches either on the sidewalks and/or in the parking lots. 

j)  Use your creativity, this blog, and Fr. Pavone’s Preists for Life organization to maximize the pro-life vote in your diocese.

Our next Article #13 highlights how extremely anti-life is the character of Barrack Obama, the adverse consequences to pro-life progress if he’s elected, and a suggested letter for you to send to your bishop to get his attention to our plan because of Obama.   

* JAMES BOPP, Jr. & BARRY BOSTROM Legal Opinion 

“…[T]he distribution of campaign material by others in the church parking lot will not jeopardize the church’s tax exempt status.  The mere permission of distribution of campaign materials by others in the church parking lot is not regulated by the Internal Revenue Code.  The Code and its regulations are designed to limit only the activities and expenditures of non-profit organizations.  Distribution of campaign materials by others outdoors, in a public parking lot, is not an activity or expenditure of the church…

“…[I]n most states there are state court decisions holding that such activity is protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and/or the State Constitution, and therefore, the church will suffer no adverse consequences as a result of this activity.  There are many cases recognizing the free speech rights of individuals and protecting speech and petitioning, reasonably exercised, in public areas, even when the property is privately owned…

“In other words, churches not only may permit campaign statements to be distributed in their parking lots, they cannot prohibit such distributions because the parking lots are open to the public.”

 

    

DO YOU KNOW? Series Article #11

  

DO YOU KNOW THIS PLAN TO SAVE BABIES DOESN’T DEPEND ON OUR BISHOPS IN ORDER TO MAKE IT HAPPEN BY NOVEMBER 4TH, 2008?

If the Bishop of your diocese will take leadership of this plan and participate in just three ways, implementation will certainly be easier, more productive, and more effective because it would open up more participation by your parish clergy, give your effort more clout, and allow you to distribute the necessary flyer inside church as a bulletin stuffer or pass out piece instead of outside on the sidewalk or in the parking lots, which is legal, by the way.   We are certain to have Catholics for Obama organizations passing out their propaganda on some of our church sidewalks after Sunday masses in October.

Here are the three ways your Bishop can lead and participate:

1)  Give his approval to use our two-sided one sheet (preferably in color if you can afford it or find a donor) flyer, or his revision of it, as a bulletin stuffer or pass-out piece after Sunday masses in October.  For the correct text on the Church’s teaching see Article #5a on this Blog (www.viewsfromthepews.wordpress.com).

2) Give his approval to pass out a voter’s guide that identifies presidential and senatorial candidates’ positions on life issues.

3) Engage his pastors and their clergy to talk about and support from the pulpit the Church’s teaching on the life issues, their superior moral equivalence, and the distribution of these tools in their parishes by the pastor’s Right-to-Life ministries in order to maximize their pro-life turnout for the election. 

However, if that won’t work, let’s get back to the title statement above.  We believe there are four types of Catholic voters: 

1) Those who have voted for the pro-life candidate in the past because of the candidate’s stance on life issues.

2) Those who have voted for the pro-life candidate for reasons other than the candidate’s stance on life issues.

3) Those who have voted for the anti-life candidate in the past because of the candidate’s stance on life issues.

4) Those who have voted for the anti-life candidate for reasons other than the candidate’s stance on life issues.

The research we’ve seen tells us that 52% of voting Catholics in 2000 voted for the anti-life democrat candidate, Al Gore, and 48% in 2004 voted for anti-life John Kerry.  We don’t know the reasons behind their votes.  So, we don’t know if some of those Catholic voters who voted pro-life were actually anti-life (pro-choice), but didn’t like either Gore or Kerry, and some who voted anti-life were actually pro-life but did so because they didn’t like Bush for some reason.

However, we believe that if all Catholic voters understand the consequences of their vote; 1) that the lives of 35 million babies over the next 30 years hangs in the balance, 2) that Church teaching says that voting anti-life (pro-choice) is intrinsically evil, and 3) that such an act is gravely sinful; then enough more of them will vote for pro-life candidates this year to make the difference in saving those 35 million lives in the womb.  In other words, Catholic voters must unite morally for this election instead of fragmented by political party, union membership, and a lack of understanding about the moral equivalence of other issues versus the right-to-life issues. (See Articles #6 and #7).

That is the premise of our plan and the title statement above. The key word to make that happen is EDUCATION, education of enough diocesan church-going Catholic parishioners in several swing states to duplicate what happened in Florida and Ohio in 2004 (see Article #3 under B.3)  HOW CAN THE CATHOLIC VOTE MAKE THE DIFFERENCE). 

WHAT WILL EDUCATE OUR CATHOLIC VOTERS?

The central piece of material for educating our Catholic voters is one 8½ x 11 inch flyer (mentioned above) printed on two sides entitled: “HERE’S WHAT CATHOLIC VOTERS NEED TO KNOW TO MEET OUR MORAL OBLIGATIONS IN VOTING.”  (Email chuck.suter @sbcglobal.net  for a four color copy on a Word document attachment.)  Voter guides can be used in dioceses where they are allowed by your pastor with support of your bishop.

HOW WILL THEY BE EDUCATED?

1) Pro-Life volunteers will pass out the flyers to parishioners inside the church after Sunday masses in dioceses where they are allowed to by your pastors with support of your bishop.

2) Pro-Life volunteers will pass out the flyers to parishioners outside the church during and/or after Sunday masses on the sidewalk or the parking lots where they are not allowed to do it inside the church by their pastors or bishop.  Sidewalks and parking lots are considered public property, so it is not illegal to pass out material there.

3) In dioceses where the bishops take leadership of this plan, further education will be accomplished from homilies on the Church’s teaching regarding voting in the election.

WHEN WILL THEY BE EDUCATED?

After the weekend masses between now and November 2nd depending on the time it takes to print flyers, raise the money to pay for them, assemble teams to distribute them at mass, arrange distribution to all the parishes in the diocese, and determine the leadership of your bishop and support of your clergy.

WHAT WILL BE THE COST?

With this simple plan without any frills and whistles (advertising, media, paid help, etc.) the only cost is reproduction of the flyers. This can be as low as four cents per two-sided black and white copy or $40 per thousand.  For a parish of 3000 families, the cost is $120 if every family takes one.  If you want every member of the family to get one, then figure about 2.7 people per family or $324 for a parish of 3000 families (8100 parishioners).  Fewer flyers are needed if you put them on car windshields in the parking lots.  If that’s intimidating to you then just remember what’s at stake in this effort: potentially 30 more years of abortion and 35 million more dead babies on top of the 50 million already murdered ruthlessly since 1973. 

We have a version with a colored picture of the aborted baby Malachi with his story from the Priests For Life website on one side of the flyer.  That raises your cost to about 42 cents apiece unless you can find a volunteer donor in your parish.  Then, if you add the four color picture of Monica to the other side, the cost goes up to 84 cents apiece.  The pictures add impact if you can afford it.

So, following are the Vision, Mission, and Goals of this plan:

PLAN B TO MAXIMIZE THE CATHOLIC

PRO-LIFE VOTE IN 2008!

1) VISION

A morally united Catholic Community in the Dallas Diocese of clergy and laity working together to do God’s work of maximizing Catholic voter turnout for pro-life candidates in next fall’s election and of setting the example for other dioceses in the nation to end the silence and help save 35 million babies over 30 years.

2) MISSION

To inform all voting age Catholics we can reach of the Catholic Church’s teaching regarding:

a) our moral obligations for voting in our country’s elections…

b) the evil of the right-to-life issues of abortion, euthanasia, destruction of embryonic stem cells, and human cloning, and the homosexual issue of same-sex marriage and their superior moral equivalence in the electoral process…

c) the facts concerning the positions of the candidates and their parties on the key right-to-life issues in elections…

d) the consequences to us of violating the teaching of the  Church on those issues when voting.

3) GOALS/OBJECTIVES

1)  A pro-life practicing Catholic vote of 65% or better in the Dallas diocese for the 2008 election on the presidential and senatorial tickets.

2)  A minimum of one homily on voting pro-life before the election in each parish participating in the plan.

3)  A minimum of 5 swing states contacted and participating in this plan in a minimumof 5 dioceses each.  The likely swing states this year appear to be Floida, Ohio, Missouri, Virginia, Minnesota, Colorado, Arizona, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Nevada.  There are others and these could change.

Beliefs and Values, Strategies, Action Steps, People, and Timing parts of the plan will be presented in the next Article.

 

 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.