12 Responses to Küüünnng!

  • One of the last things that the text at the link above says is this: “Instead of reconciling with the ultra-conservative, anti-democratic, and anti-Semitic SSPX, the Pope should rather care about the majority of reform-minded Catholics and reconcile with the churches of the Reformation and the entire ecumenical movement. Thus he would unite, and not divide.”

    Well, the Pope is reconciling with both. He’s bridging the gap with SSPX, and he’s welcoming orthodox Anglicans into the Church. He’s also done a lot with reconciling with the Lutherans and the Eastern Orthodox. Even at the local diocesan level, lots has been done. For example, about 2 years ago Bishop Burbidge of the Diocese of Raleigh met with the Superintendent of the Assemblies of God to discuss the gifts of the Holy Spirit. I am sure many other things like that are being done.

    So what exactly is the Pope doing EXCEPT uniting? Geez, I must come from a planet different than what Hans Kung comes from. Or maybe he wants uniting to be done with the pro-aborts, pro-gays of Bishopress Schori of the ECUSA, the commie pinkoes of the Unitarian Universalist Church, and other liberal monstrosities.

    Ain’t
    A’gonna’
    Happen.

  • Oh, man, he is so envious of his old theology classmate getting elected Pope that it just oozes out. Is it really that hard, to figure out that he should submit to the will of God and stop acting like such a maroon?

    And what a maroon. He got offered a deal already; the poor pope gave him a nice lunch right after his election. He could probably pick up the phone today and get a deal within a few hours. But he doesn’t want to repent and come to terms; he wants to be both pope and a feted dissenter.

  • Hans, I’m laughing at the “superior” intellect.

  • What, exactly, has Kuuuuuung done for unity?

    (I really don’t want to see Kuuuuuung in that Ricardo Montalban outfit – something tells me he couldn’t pull it off).

  • No, he’s just tweeting his location and current activity: “From hell’s heart, I spit at thee.”

  • Pope Benedict: [Calling Kung] This is Pope Benedict. We tried it once your way, Kung, are you game for a rematch? Kung, I’m laughing at the “superior intellect.”
    Kung: Full publication of my unpublished manuscripts!
    Kung Minion: No, sir! You have “Infallible? An Inquiry”. Your work will endure…
    Kung: [grabs Minion in anger] FULL PUBLICATION! DAMN YOU!

  • Hans who? Does anyone outside of his own small club even know Kung is still alive and kicking? Back in the 70s his thick “On Being A Christian” was the toast of mainline Protestants, but since then, I am unaware of anything he has written making a splash. I don’t see why he his carping now should gain him any notice. Beter to do his embarrassed former dissertation advisor Louis Bouyer a favor and just ignore him.

  • Is that the caddish Catlick, HMV Tone Blair?

  • Thank you, Donald McClarey for your clarification of Kung. He demands an IMPRIMATUR for his writing which may or may not deserve an IMPRIMATUR. It is good to see Kung’s humility. Thanks again.

  • Paul W. Primavera: “Or maybe he wants uniting to be done with the pro-aborts, pro-gays of Bishopress Schori of the ECUSA, the commie pinkoes of the Unitarian Universalist Church, and other liberal monstrosities.” and other liberal monstrosities. bears repeating.

Brother Dan Doesn’t Like the March for Life

Tuesday, January 24, AD 2012

Most Catholic pro-lifers know the truth, and lament it, that if all Catholics in this country fought against abortion, the days of legalized abortion in these United States could be measured in months.  Alas, that is not the case.  Half the Catholics in this country routinely give their votes to the political party that is pledged to keep abortion legal, and many of these same Catholics routinely work against the pro-life movement.  Curious how that segment of Catholics was observing the March for Life, I wandered over to the National Catholic Reporter and read a post, read it here, which gave paeans of praise to a post, go here to read it and the comments,  by a Franciscan Brother, Daniel P. Horan, at his website, Dating God, explaining why he does not support the March for Life.  It so perfectly embodies the mindset among Catholics that has enabled abortion to remain legal for the past four decades that I decided it was worthy of a fisk.

There are indeed numerous reasons to withhold support for the so-called “March for Life.” I wish here to highlight three of the reasons that I have serious reservations about the annual ‘pilgrimage’ to Washington, DC, that draws thousands of well-meaning people, the young and the old alike.

Ah, come on Brother Dan, the use of the term “so-called” as an adjective to modify something that one does not approve of is so cliché.  You can certainly do better than that!

 Ah, but before I go further, I feel as though I need to qualify that last sentence. While the generational divide is usually traversed by a diverse representation of different ages and from idealistic youth and young adults to the more narrowly focused and opinion-concretized geriatric crowd, there is very little racial and ethnic diversity represented.

People on the left are as obsessed as any Ku Kluxer with skin color.  Intellectual diversity however, never seems to be of much concern to them.

Anticipating the likely unhappy responses in what will appear in the comment section below, I suppose it is necessary to acknowledge that there are indeed African-American, Latino/a and Asian women and men who arrive for the events of the annual pilgrimage.

Yeah, Brother Dan lots of ’em, a fact that you would know if you bothered attending the March.

However, their numbers reflect that category into which they are so blindly corralled in this country – a minority. The sea of protesters (and that is what they are) is overwhelmingly white and that is not an insignificant dimension of the event.  

Once again the obsession with race.  The marchers Brother Dan want to save all the unborn, no matter what their skin color.

Among the various reasons one might chose to omit him or herself from participation, I wish to highlight three: (a) the event’s moniker is incomplete at best and disingenuous at worst, (b) the mode of protest has proven ineffective, and, following the second point, (c) the ‘march’ and its related events is a self-serving exercise in self-righteousness, self-congratulatory grandstanding and disinterest in the most pressing matters of human rights and dignity in our world today.  

If stopping the slaying of the most innocent and defenseless among is not the most pressing matter of human rights and dignity in the world today, I wonder what is?  I am sure Brother Dan will enlighten us!

 To begin, I have no problem with people of faith taking a public stance against abortion.

Big of you Brother Dan!

You will never find me supporting abortion legislation nor encouraging those with and for whom I minister as a Roman Catholic cleric to support abortion.

Just casting aspersions from the side lines against those fighting against this manifest evil. 

I believe it is a legitimate issue against which, as a Christian and Roman Catholic, I feel should be a thematic feature of social transformation.

“A thematic feature of social transformation”, whatever the heck that is supposed to mean.

 However, it is not, at all, the most important issue, nor is it the single issue upon which Catholics – or anyone – should focus in an exclusive manner. 

Why not?  Most great evils in this world have been removed due to a single-minded focus upon a particular evil for a time.  The crusade against slavery in this country comes immediately to mind.

Continue reading...

61 Responses to Brother Dan Doesn’t Like the March for Life

  • Is Br. Hogan monastic?

    He certainly doesn’t seem to be afflicted by the realities of an active participation in this issue. Has he not heard of The Gabriel Project? The litany of links on the right of this page is broad enough that anybody who wishes can have as much useful information as could be digested.

    There are many of us in the Church who believe that all life is sacred – that euthanasia, war and capital punishment are also contrary to the teachings of Christ (a dead enemy cannot enjoy Christian fellowship with you, and a dead man can’t reconcile) – but we do not keep this as sine qua non for being anti-abortion; I personally bristle at Br. Hogan’s assertions.

    In any event, I hope somebody at the See sees his screed and gently reminds him of his commitment under Holy Orders to render unto God what is God’s and forget the rest.

  • Brother Dan thanks God that he is not like that taxpayer over there.

  • Er, tax collector.

    Sigh. Coffee time.

  • The tax collector analogy came to mind as I was reading his post Dale. My guess is that what he wrote probably passes for common wisdom in his circles which is a depressing insight into the state of too much of the Catholic Church in this country.

  • One of the more annoying rejoinders I have heard used against those who are pro-life is the assertion is that unless you are anti-everything-else listed in the seamless garment perspective you are a hypocrite, or else motivated by some deep seated anger against women. Even if you hold that all of the other issues usually listed in the seamless garment perspective carry equal moral weight, the last time I looked there are only 24 hours in a day, and most of us have lives that require us to work, care for children and family, and address other such minor diversions. Most people pick and choose their battles, and to suggest that one must devote equal amounts of time and energy to all these causes to maintain some sort of moral eqipoise is absurd.

  • Thank you for posting this, it is eye-opening. Man does he sound angry – can’t he just pop in Brother Sun and Sister Moon and chill out?

    Seriously though, does anyone know to which province Horan belongs? I’d like to know how they consider his viewpoints. While we live in a democracy, there is, or at least was, a discipline in religious orders when it came to statements like his in public forums. I apologize for coming across as naive about Franciscans. The Franciscans I know are Pro-Life (albeit they fixate on physical poverty over spiritual poverty, ironically) and would never hold forth in such a manner.

    I will strongly reconsider financial support of the Franciscans, which I have done in the past.

  • This type of story is one of the reasons that I have many protestant brothers and sisters questioning my faith and whether it is truly Christian. They wonder why clerics or clergy are allowed to make such statements publicly and are not censured or punished (may be a poor choice of words). I do not have a decent reply when they are making such a valid point. I pray that all those Catholics that are not following the church teachings reconsider and learn there faith and following its beliefs.

  • All I can wonder is when the last time Brother Dan was at the March, because he seems significantly out-of-touch with what goes on and the type of person who attends the March for Life.
    If Americans died at the rate of 3,000 daily from any other cause, you can bet we would want to fight that cause! We would vote based on that illness or natural disaster and its relief; we would have banners and posters to fight that reality; we would march. What is wrong with publicly denouncing the murder of literally thousands of our brothers and sisters daily with an annual protest?
    I’m a Salesian Sister of St. John Bosco; I’m pro-life, and I intend to educate the young to speak up in respect for life, especially the life of the unborn.

  • Br. Dan and Fr. Angelus aren’t about to let something so trivial as the “so-called pro-life movement” stand in the way of their devotion to the Democrat Party (and the praise from the “smart-set” Catholics that accompanies such devotion).

  • Richard-
    my husband asks me the same thing. Best thing I can answer is that the system is incredibly slow, and it requires that a long list of people do what they ought. (Misbehavior is reported to the cleric’s superior, they either talk to the guy or pass it up, lots of opportunities to repent and reform which means even more delay, lots of work to try to avoid driving out those that have been misled, trying to correct those who have weak or flawed formation without destroying them….)

    Sister-
    Even more depressing, although we don’t know exactly how many women die of abortion complications, I’d lay serious money that it’s more than the kids who die in association drop-side cribs (~13 a year–includes SIDS and jumping out to land on your head, etc) and yet, somehow, one is worthy of being banned and the other needs to be “protected.”

    Thankfully, the pro-death crowd is getting to the point of self-parody and it’s turning off some of those who have been manipulated into supporting it– I know of at least one “it’s a woman’s choice, it’s so tough, I can’t judge” type Catholic who’s now anti-abortion because of the Gosnell abortuary coverage. (Or un-coverage, since so much of the “compassion” argument depends on things being hidden.)

  • The National Catholic Reporter column mentioned “REASON” no less than five times in its short piece. Everybody else is unreasonable, and only they have the “REASON”, but they would not have “REASON” if their brain had been aborted and their tax dollars used to experiment on their aborted brain.

  • This past Sunday I taught my 7th grade CCD class all about abortion. I really wish I had this post so I could have read it to the kids. I wouldn’t have used names (so the kids wouldn’t be scandalized by this friar), but would have gone through the dialogue back and forth.

    The number of abortions occuring are staggering.

    I think it’s very important to teach our children early what the pro-abortion arguments are. How they try to confuse with words. So when one of our young impressionable kids hears it they can have that internal dialogue of “I already heard this and I know why it’s wrong” and are not swayed.

    Thank you for this post, I will be using in next year (with appropriate rewording for the age group) or even in a later class if the opportunity arises.

  • Before I continue reading (I am excruciatingly slow) it is extremely important to realize and accept that the MARCH FOR LIFE is the Constitutional First Amendment right to peaceable assembly to petition the government for redress, and if there were only one person attending, he would be a majority of one. I did so enjoy seeing all those persons expressing their freedom (and mine). and thinking WOW. And although I could not march, I got to see Nellie Gray and Chris Smith and Father Pavone. Thank God. Government does not have authentic authority to define the corporal and spiritual works of mercy, giving food to the hungry, to Terry Schiavo, or to dictate the will of God to God and to the people of God, when the person is constituted by his immortal soul and brought into existence. Government has no legal ability to redefine the human person by withholding the acknowedgement of his conscience. Government is establised to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our constitutional posterity, all future generations. Taxing citizens for obligations not fulfilled is extortion and taxation without representation. At least Brother Dan might have spoken up for some of our money, if not our life. Obama has subsummed all future generations as liabilities.

  • WK. Aiken: Capital punishment is the temporal punishment due to one found guilty of capital homicide and may be found in Acquinas’ just war theory. Only a person who has been rehabilitated may live. A truly repentant capital one murderer must expire with grief over his crime or his contrition is not perfect and society does not have to accept imperfect contrition or to enable the murderer to commit another homicide which will make society liable for the crime.

  • Donald R. McClarey:
    I am so glad you set Brother Dan straight on his path. Thank you.

  • Great fisk Don. That was one of the most uncharitable & condescending pieces of writing by a so-called Brother I have ever read! Plus, I made the mistake of reading the comments, ick. But I take heart; what his writing really means is that the March for Life does make a difference and hearts & minds are changing – odd that this bothers so-called Br. Dan.

  • Pingback: TUESDAY U.S. PRO-LIFE EXTRA I | ThePulp.it
  • Congressman Allen West (R. Florida), perhaps the most electrifying speaker at the March for Life this year:

  • Thank you Will, Mary, Chris and Lisa for your kind words. We will wage this fight for the protection of innocent life until we prevail, and when we do we can all remember those who lent a hand to help in the struggle. Those who sneered from the sidelines will be forgotten, the usual fate of those who stand idle while a great evil is afoot.

  • “While the generational divide is usually traversed by a diverse representation of different ages and from idealistic youth and young adults to the more narrowly focused and opinion-concretized geriatric crowd, there is very little racial and ethnic diversity represented. ”

    – ! – idealistic youth: Br., it is good that they exist and haven’t been drowned in misery and evil of opinions. There were many accompanied by parents, teachers, and priests (some of whom are becoming reality’s super heroes and, by example, teaching the Gospel).

    – ! – narrowly focused opinion- concretized geriatric crowd: This red flag of a phrase from a Franciscan brother is abomination. Who passed the law to begin this mess? Can’t resist saying it sort of takes one to know one.

    “I have heard numerous people, even those who avidly support the march, lament that the Vigil Mass has become more a “Who’s Who” of a sector of the American Catholic Church than it has the Eucharistic celebration it alleges to be.”

    – ! – Good thing for the American Catholic Church. Also, is this sentence an invitation to the evil of gossip.

    “Perhaps, just maybe, a single Samaritan or even a few might be among the crowd and stop to pick up the ignored and forgotten and left-for-dead issues that continue to threaten life and human dignity in our world.”

    “Binary” good/evil, “Binary” moral, Boutique issue.

    What could be the in-between of good and evil that you frightfully imply? Maybe, yesterday you missed the chance to see any Samaritans while you were in the boutique. It will be televised Sat. at 2:00.

  • Someone should tell Brother Dan there might have been more blacks at the March for Life if they hadn’t comprised the 60% of the abortions that have taken place since Roe v. Wade. On another note, how could Brother Dan know about the marchers’ self-congratulatory attitude unless he’d been given Divine permission to sit in judgment of them? Finally someone should tell him that if doing the same thing and expecting different results is insanity, he’d probably want to avoid frequent confession.l

  • “Yet, innocence is a construct that has theological and ethical implications and characteristics that have been explored on this website as well as on the excellent WIT: Women in Theology website. I will not rehearse those discussions here.”

    Here’s a link to WIT. I haven’t checked but I suspect they might look upon the fetus as an unjust aggressor on a woman’s body.

    http://womenintheology.org/

  • I haven’t checked but I suspect they [Women In Theology] might look upon the fetus as an unjust aggressor on a woman’s body.
    Phillip

    Claiming the pre-born person one brought into existence – into a state of unvolitional bodily engulfment and dependence onto oneself – is an “unjust aggressor” mocks reality. Sure, someone might object that this has left a loophole that doesn’t rule out abortions in cases of rape. But that apparent opening (in the seamless garment?) is closed off by other moral prescriptions, including the obligations of charity.

    Still, someone might ignore charity and appeal to the State that this is a practical matter of the pre-born person being a trespasser. Well, we should not practice using the State’s authority to do harm to anyone presumed innocent. Mustn’t there be due process for a person accused of the crime of trespass? It seems to me a trial is required. And as a practical matter the State must wait until the person accused is competent to stand trial… yes?

  • I was not able to force myself through all his drivel. Made me nauseous. I simply cannot understand how the slaughter of a defenseless innocent child can be ho-hummed away. I know monumental injustice, intimately, but these are children burned to death or torn to shreds……

  • “Mustn’t there be due process for a person accused of the crime of trespass?”

    Indeed Michael. I have done many trespass cases and can recall not a one where the Defendant was executed.

  • My comment was tongue-in-cheek. However not so much for WIT:

    “First, it is for this reason that some moral theologians (including, I think, Cathy Kaveny on the Commonweal blog) have argued that the fetus could be thought of in some situations (such as the Phoenix case) as a materially unjust aggressor. It does not intend to attack the mother’s body in an unjust way, but it nonetheless is doing just that, for reasons out of its control. Thus the fetus would be in the same category as the starving but insane man who lunges at your head with a knife because he is convinced it’s actually a melon that sits atop your shoulders. Killing such a person could be said to constitute self-defense.

    Second, and of more interest to me in this post, is that formal innocence is not usually what we mean when we talk about a fetus being innocent. Rather, we mean innocent in the sentimental way that we call adorable animals and babies innocent (Augustine notwithstanding). We mean they are helpless, pitiable, and not [yet] mean beings who can insult us or harm us–and how could you be so cold-hearted that you’d kill such a creature? This kind of rhetoric automatically juxtaposes the innocent fetus with other kinds of people whom society (and a large portion of the pro-life demographic, judging from voting statistics) does not usually call innocent and finds generally threatening or disgusting: enemy soldiers, death row inmates, and worst of all in this discourse, the women who seek abortions in the first place. It is no coincidence, in my opinion, that the pro-life movement is often criticized for failing to care about just this kind of life outside the womb.”

    http://womenintheology.org/2011/01/25/fetuses-are-not-innocent/

  • It is no coincidence, in my opinion, that the pro-life movement is often criticized for failing to care about just this kind of life outside the womb.

    Well, of course not. If you can’t win on substance and facts, you have to fight by changing the subject and making stuff up.

  • ” because of the so-called innocence of the fetuses ”

    whats next brother Dan? Spokesperson for Planned Parenthood?

  • Are you sure that this “Brother Dan” and God are still dating??? I just wondered if they were perhaps on the verge of breaking up or something…telling post indeed. Thanks, Donald.

  • Richard,

    Having experienced Brother Dan’s in Chanceries and formation programs in several dioceses, I can say he truly believes he is carrying out God’s work. His type are possessed of a radical ideology formed of the sixties that reduces the Gospel to social issues. They pick from authentic Catholic Social teaching when it meets their needs – even shouting out “its infallible” when needed. Then turning their back upon authentic teaching when it doesn’t suit their ends.

    The “Seamless Garment” is a perfect example. It is used to manipulate others to accept that any opposition to raising the maginal tax rate or any govt. cuts is equal to supporting abortion.

    Of course if you take the thoughts of Brother Dan and Women in Theology such things are not the same. Opposing tax hikes is worse than aborting an “unjust aggressor.”

  • Phillip,

    Right. They think the Gospel says “You have this World. It’s all you have. You need to make it the best thou canst.” See Orwell’s essay on Gandhi. He knew you choose the worldly or the Spiritual. He does not say one is better. He says they are incompatible. And, he concludes the mildest liberal through the violent revolutionary has opted for the worldly.

    So, what if they kill 45,000,000 unborn, the dems are for making Heaven on Earth. And, that’s what it’s all about.

    And, they believe the rich and tax cuts for the rich steal from the undocumented migrants, poor unionized public school teachers, millionaire Federal bureaucrats, UAW workers of GM, 10,000 ACORN-clones, Willy Horton, and et al.

    And, it is working oh so according to plan: “People are hurting, and badly. The official unemployment rate may have fallen, slightly, but the real unemployment rate — the number of working-age Americans who aren’t working — rose from about 12% before the 2008 crisis, to about 23%, and hasn’t come down. That includes people who have retired early because they can’t find work, spouses who used to earn a second income but have gone back to homemaking because work isn’t available, self-employed people whose businesses have collapsed, young people who live in their parents’ basement because they can’t afford tuition and can’t find work. . . . Roughly one out of eight Americans who presumably want to work, and were working before 2007, can’t find work today.”

  • A good rule of thumb is, whatever the National Catholic Distorter says is good and reasonable, really isn’t.

  • His type are possessed of a radical ideology formed of the sixties that reduces the Gospel to social issues. They pick from authentic Catholic Social teaching when it meets their need

    Evidently he was born in 1982, grew up in Utica, N.Y., and got the first leg of his tertiary schooling at St. Bonaventure University in Olean, N.Y. Radicalism was certainly not something he would have absorbed from his social matrix.

  • “Radicalism was certainly not something he would have absorbed from his social matrix.”

    What social matrix would that be?

  • Lots of witty prose in the article and the comments. It’s unfortunate that most of it is scornful. If we could criticize in a more constructive fashion, wouldn’t we be more successful in the anti-abortion effort. We as Catholics should be leaders in this domain instead of following in the footsteps of the vitriolic politicians.

  • Not so much scorn as heartfelt response. Just as Br. Dan is heartfelt in his comments. We just believe he is wrong.

  • Kyle- the proper response to someone claiming to prove that a tiny baby is not innocent is scorn. The response to a Catholic brother who attacks those who protest the slaughter of the unborn is a great deal stronger than scorn.

    If we could criticize in a more constructive fashion

    If? Not only can we do so, we do— when appropriate, and in ways appropriate. “Constructive criticism” usually means soft words and gentle suggestions. When there’s a Catholic brother using dishonest– though standard– rhetorical tricks to attack those who do the small thing of publicly protesting the slaughter of children, it’s unlikely to be appropriate. When dealing with someone who actually tries to write a justification of the slaughter of a tiny baby because they’re not “really” innocent, it’s unlikely to be appropriate.
    A point-by-point response that offers the scorn due this justification of attacking the defenders of children coming from a Franciscan is more likely to be constructive than honeyed words. He’s clearly heard them before, to no effect.

  • Bro, sounds guilt-ridden. Maybe because he’s so wrong and his conscience is trying to tell him something. Yes, the poor can be fed but the aborted baby is DEAD. Which should take priority. You can convince people to help the poor but can you bring the DEAD back to life? Should I try to help a woman shot by a gun or give her a sack of flour, Bro.? Seamless garment is a cop out. What judging of peoples movtives who are attending the March. Should we keep bringing it to the light or sit home and run the soup kitchen while 54 million children have been killed in this country alone. How many poor have died in this country? thousands proably. No comparision. Its not a matter of innocence vs. guilty it about LIFE vs. DEATH. You can’t be any poorer than DEAD.

  • That Bro. Dan unfortunately proves the point that you can’t fix stupid.

  • St. Francis is weeping.

  • -I find it striking and disturbing that Brother Dan, associated with the Church as he is, not only thinks this way, but writes about it, broadcasting his opinions that DIRECTLY contradict the Church.
    -Brother Dan talks about the lack of racial diversity (implying that white folks are trying to force minorites to have babies) in the Pro-Life March. Think of this another way. “White” folks are protesting abortion that kills a much higher percentage of minority babies than white babies. If the white folks are racist they would think that fewer minority babies is good, would they not? If “white” folks think that fewer minority babies is good, why protest against abortion? Let them kill themselves off!
    -If Brother Dan wants to personally focus on poverty, unemployment, at-risk teens, etc., then great. There are so many areas of human existance that need help. But that does not mean ridicule those who focus on the Pro-Life issues. ALL human life is valuable, Bro. Dan, you cannot take the attitude of ‘let’s fix the people we have before we add more’; Jesus taught that the poor will always be with us, not to say that caring for the poor is useless, but that there are teachings, beliefs and moral standards that are timeless.
    -Commentor Philips’ link to Women in Theology where the writer attacks the concept of innocent life, etc., literally turned my stomach. Comparing pregnancy to an unjust attack on a woman’s body, calling concerns for the innocent lives the same as our sentimental love of cute baby animals, etc. I do not “live in a cave”, but I have never read such things, even with my reading on Nazism and Eugenics – not an emotional exaggeration. O.M.G.

  • Micha Elyi: Let me add: The person is invited by the marital act and therefore cannot be an “UNJUST aggressor”. In a tubal implantation which might cause death, both the mother and child must be saved, if possible. Otherwise, intent to commit abortion is extrauterine homicide. The contradiction here is that the person whose existence is willed by God cannot be both and at the same time, a non-person and a criminal. The child is innocent until the age of reason counted at seven because of a lack of reason, and then counted as an infant child in a court of law until emancipation. To give informed consent after the age of emancipation to a crime is against the law. In cases of rape, the innocent victim who is doing the will of God and nature’s God cannot be put to death because of the crimes of his parent. Only for his own crimes can a man be put to death. Rapists ought to be put in jail for their rest of their lives. Abortion defies the will of God. Nobody comes into existence but by the will of God.

  • Br.Dan”…have heard numerous people, even those who avidly support the march, lament that the Vigil Mass has become more a “Who’s Who” of a sector of the American Catholic Church than it has the Eucharistic celebration it alleges to be.”

    Dr. McClarey: No one has ever claimed Brother Dan that the March for Life is a celebration of the Eucharist. That allegation is simply bizarre.
    Brother Dan is calling the Vigil Mass an “alleged” Eucharistic celebration. NOW, Brother Dan has gone too far…(censored by the poster) The devil is jealous.

  • What social matrix would that be?

    Utica and St. Bonaventure.

  • Pillip: About INNOCENCE. Our Creator (The Declaration of Independence) creates a rational, immortal soul to bring man into existence, as man is comprised of body and rational soul. There is no sin in God. God cannot and does not create sin, therefore, the rational, immortal soul endowed with unalienable rights to life, sovereign personhood and virginity is perfectly innocent at creation and endowment. The human being is an image and likesness of God, our Creator, in perfect moral and legal innocence at the first moment of his existence. The newly begotten child of God has a guardian angel. This guardian Angel is dispossessed of his charge and joins the soul back to God. Planned Parenthood cannot kill a person twice, but I bet they would like to try. Women in Theology? no way. If laymen and non-Catholics of good will can write of freedom….

  • Mary @4:24P.M. You are good. Keep up the good work

  • Art: Born in 1982? Brother Dan sounds like a decrepid old, very old man, whose brain has atrophied. No tongue-in-cheek.

  • Art,

    Reading the information from St Bonaventure, it seems it is well affected by the spirit of the 60’s.

    One needs not have been born in the sixties to be affected by the university environment fostered by it.

  • I left this comment on his blog, which apparently he will not allow to be posted:

    “So another rich, privileged, white man withholds his participation from a diverse, grassroots, protest movement. Sounds like the same old song, just a different singer.”

    I guess he didn’t like the irony.

  • @Mary De Voe “Art: Born in 1982? Brother Dan sounds like a decrepid old, very old man, whose brain has atrophied. No tongue-in-cheek.”

    Bingo! Br. Dan’s Church of the Hip ’70s is dying. Did you notice that he has two Master’s degrees from the Washington Theological Union. Guess what? WTU is closing this year because of lack of funding, students, and support from the consortium of religious orders that founded it.

  • Reading the information from St Bonaventure, it seems it is well affected by the spirit of the 60?s.

    Compared to where? They have one facially problematic course of study: Women’s studies. All of their graduate programs bar one are in vocational subjects. They have no anthropology faculty and the race-class-gender obsessives you see elsewhere appear to be almost absent from their faculties of history, sociology, and political science. (I am judging from course descriptions and the titles of presentations given and scholarly articles published). There red flags you see in the course descriptions, personal statements, publication titles, and presentation titles of the education faculty are actually a pale pink. I have little doubt the place could be better than it is, but in the scheme of things there appears to be rather less crud than you would expect in baccalaureate institution.

    The place is located in Olean, a pleasant and unpretentious town of about 18,000. That’s a Republican area. He grew up in Utica, also a place almost free of protest politics. The overwhelming reality in both the Southern Tier and the Mohawk Valley has been a decades long process of adjustment to industrial outmigration. In and around Utica, the one place you encounter leftobabble is the campus of Hamilton College, a place run by and for outsiders.

    One needs not have been born in the sixties to be affected by the university environment fostered by it.

    The guy’s just a sport.

  • Bingo! Br. Dan’s Church of the Hip ’70s is dying.

    He grew up in the Diocese of Syracuse. The church of the Hip ’70s is fairly unusual if not unknown therabouts. The church of casual violations of liturgical norms and music appropriate to score a TV movie sponsored by Hallmark and inane homilies in which the phrase ‘relationship with God’ occurs again and again is what you gett here (and I would wager what he grew up with). The benefit of growing up in Utica is that the Eastern-rites are close at hand. Those parishes are anything but packed, however.

  • Is it just me, or did anyone else hear Br. Dan’s post being read in their head by the voice of Sheldon Cooper?

  • It’s a good thing Br. Dan’s mother didn’t have the same attitudes that he does, OR he wouldn’t be here!

    His superior should be monitering what he says about any Catholic teachings. Oh yeah, Br. Dan what are you doing for the unborn?

  • Donald, sorry I have been indisposed for some days. But even before I read all the respondents here, tell me, Donald, is this “Brother Dan” a Roman Catholic?? Because reading the excerpts of his Article is he totally against the Teachings of the Catholic Church on this very very crucial Moral Issue of genocide against our neighbours in their first, and the safest home – their mothers’ wombs. This is a Cardial Sin, a Sacrilege of the First Order. If he is truly a Catholic Brother, his Superior must kick him out YERSTERDAY

  • “is this “Brother Dan” a Roman Catholic”

    Yes Mary, and a Franciscan. Perhaps Brother Dan might wish to take a moment from perusing the Women In Theology website to read this excerpt from Saint Bonaventure’s life of Saint Francis:

    ” It happened in the third year before his death, that in order to excite the inhabitants of Grecio to commemorate the nativity of the Infant Jesus with great devotion, [St. Francis] determined to keep it with all possible solemnity; and lest he should be accused of lightness or novelty, he asked and obtained the permission of the sovereign Pontiff. Then he prepared a manger, and brought hay, and an ox and an ass to the place appointed. The brethren were summoned, the people ran together, the forest resounded with their voices, and that venerable night was made glorious by many and brilliant lights and sonorous psalms of praise. The man of God [St. Francis] stood before the manger, full of devotion and piety, bathed in tears and radiant with joy; the Holy Gospel was chanted by Francis, the Levite of Christ. Then he preached to the people around the nativity of the poor King; and being unable to utter His name for the tenderness of His love, He called Him the Babe of Bethlehem. A certain valiant and veracious soldier, Master John of Grecio, who, for the love of Christ, had left the warfare of this world, and become a dear friend of this holy man, affirmed that he beheld an Infant marvellously beautiful, sleeping in the manger, Whom the blessed Father Francis embraced with both his arms, as if he would awake Him from sleep. This vision of the devout soldier is credible, not only by reason of the sanctity of him that saw it, but by reason of the miracles which afterwards confirmed its truth. For example of Francis, if it be considered by the world, is doubtless sufficient to excite all hearts which are negligent in the faith of Christ; and the hay of that manger, being preserved by the people, miraculously cured all diseases of cattle, and many other pestilences; God thus in all things glorifying his servant, and witnessing to the great efficacy of his holy prayers by manifest prodigies and miracles. “

  • Donald, I am aggrieved…..that a Franciscan would support heartless, cruel and vicious mass slaughter of the “Innocents” by “Herod Obama” Administration must be making the Merciful Heart of Jesus pierced with a lance, gush forth Blood and Water all over again on the Cross. “Brother Dan” certainly needs a lot of prayers and the Intercession by our Holy Mother….in fact, I dare say, a Miracle. Because as it is, he is on the road to perdition just like Judas Iscariot

  • Donald:

    As the Hispanic Services Coordinator (unpaid) at a pro-life crisis pregnancy center, I, like you, counsel the women that deal with unplanned pregnancies on a daily basis. I help them deal with the “choices” that confront them, the racism they deal with on a daily basis when they elect to keep their children, and I work with women who suffer the indignities and emotional turmoil that result from having had abortions (freely or not). I support the March for Life and I am dismayed at the attitude of this Franciscan Brother. Thank you for so succinctly debating his insidious remarks and for pointing out what seems the almost obvious for those of us who are in the trenches. We may be winning slowly, but we ARE winning. LIFE will prevail over DEATH.

  • Bro. Dan, indeed, found a wonderful, and free way to promote his new book. Well done, Bro. Dan…just remember all those you are leading astray.

  • This is the problem with academia: They take obvious church teachings (i.e. the stand against abortion) and twist them using convoluted phraseology which the average person doesn’t understand (and hence cannot dispute). These academic theologians (for that is what Brother Dan is) rely upon the “openness to dialogue with others” created by Vatican II. That, plus the absolute absurdity created by feminist theologians (i.e. the Women in Theology website) creates an atmosphere in which official Catholic teaching is obscured at best, and actively hindered at worst. Now imagine going to a college influenced by these factors (i.e. St. Bonaventure) and we can see how Brother Dan may have arrived at the conclusions that he has.

    In response to Will: Br. Dan belongs to the Holy Name Province. You can find this site here: http://www.hnp.org

Another Dissident “Faithful” Catholic Attacks the Church

Wednesday, March 2, AD 2011

The same-sex marriage debate is heating up in Maryland, and our Bishops continue to fight the good fight.  Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington, Archbishop Edwin O’Brien of Baltimore, and Bishop Francis Malooly of Wilmington together wrote a statement condemning the State Assembly’s vote to approve of same-sex marriage, and urged Catholics to continue mounting opposition.  This drew the ire of Francis DeBernardo, Executive Director of something called New Ways Ministry, which is is described as a “Catholic [sic] ministry of justice and reconciliation for lesbian/gay Catholics and the wider church community.”  He writes:

Continue reading...

4 Responses to Another Dissident “Faithful” Catholic Attacks the Church

  • And until Wuerl, et al., confront FU Catholics with actual ecclesial discipline, we can expect to see legions of DeBernardos happily providing cover for the secular assault on both society and the Church.

    There are no consequences for telling the Church to blow it out her ass and–shocker!–people act accordingly.

  • It is far too late in these “social justice” debates of outright disobedience or political correctness approaches to today’s perversions of human behavior and betrayal of biblical truth for our hierarchy to simply “Urge the Laity” into action. Our actions are of little consequence within the media and for the most part futile if we do not have the weight of “Authoritive Discipline” behind our voices.
    Unless we witness prominent church officials and bishops condemning, defrocking and excommunicating these self styled ruling class individuals who present themselves as equally prominent laymen and/or politicians who openly challenge church law while imposing pain and suffering on the people with ill fated self endowed elitist rhetoric and socially lethal legislation the laity will continue to be recognized and labeled as just our president assumes us to be, uneducated uninformed homophobes clinging to our guns and bibles.
    Is there not one or two among the American Bishops willing to accept intellectual martyrdom in the name of the people of God for the sake of our country???
    Come forth Lazarus!

  • This issue can also be viewed as pastoral. When a Catholic expresses, supports and even agitates for positions contradictory to the Church, to Jesus, to God, then they may have excommunicated themselves and may be in jeopardy of eternal perdition. The pastor of this flock is required to correct his children so they may not lose their souls. It is incumbent on the bishops to make these statements; however, is it incumbent on them to punish? I am not sure. Is it incumbent upon us? Where does fraternal correction end and stern whooping begin? Spare the rod, spoil the child. Are Catholics in America just Protestants or practical atheists in disguise? Political correctness has cowed us into submission, and we are not permitted to do that. We are to be martyrs, witnesses to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and persecution is our promise.

    I am not suggesting we act like those poor morons from the Westwhatever ‘baptist’ church, yelling that God hates fags. We need to be stern and true. God, and therefore we, love people afflicted with homosexualist tendencies and out of that love we want them to stop engaging, codifying and celebrating a disordered behavior. It is not only disordered on theological grounds. Rationally it is a very dangerous practice. It is harmful to physical, emotional and mental health.

    That being said, do most Catholics listen to, care, obey or respect their bishop? Do they even know who their bishop is?

  • Pingback: THURSDAY MORNING EDITION | ThePulp.it

More MSM Foolishness on the Condom Kerfuffle

Monday, November 29, AD 2010

To be honest, I’m a little tired myself of the Great Condom Debate of 2010, and had no intention of blogging about this business.  Then I read this article in the Washington Post, and after almost giving myself a concussion from banging my head on the table, felt the need to vent a little.    It manages to combine MSM ignorance regarding the nuances of theological debate with some casual Catholic dissidence on a great moral matter.    Good times indeed.

The reporter, Michael Ruane, was getting reaction from the parishioners at St. Matthew’s Cathedral yesterday.  It should be noted that until ten months ago this was my parish, and I’m still heavily involved with it.  That the reporter managed to nail down a few people who disagreed with the Church on the issue of contraception is not necessarily an indictment of the Cathedral, as I’m sure he would have – unfortunately – received similar responses at most Churches.

To begin with, Ruane inaccurately summarizes the issue:

Continue reading...

One Response to More MSM Foolishness on the Condom Kerfuffle

E. J. Dionne & Maureen Dowd Are Playing With A Dangerous Fire

Tuesday, September 28, AD 2010

In a recent column Washington Post columnist, E J Dionne noted that the Tea Party movement is a great scam. Quite an indictment coming from the self described progressive Catholic who still thinks government can never be big enough and the Church should tell the faithful more about the teachings of the agnostic Saul Alinsky than that of 2,000 year old teachings of the Catholic Church. Dionne has made it his business to comment on all matter of politics and religion for quite some time. His partner in left wing chicanery is New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd who never hesitates to go for the jugular.  Though she says he she comes from humble Washington DC roots, you would never know it by how she mocks those who really came from humble surrounding and never forgot it. She probably grew up with many Sarah Palin’s and Christine O’Donnell’s around her. Yet, I doubt she mocked many to their face as she gleefully does now to the backs of Palin and O’Donnell.

Dionne and Dowd seem to have it backwards, they don’t think citizens should voice their views about the fallacies of liberal Big Government, but they do believe everyone knows better than the divine about religion. This is quite common for liberals who often seem to think they are divine. Dionne and Dowd are part of a movement who thinks they should control government and religion, and those who disagree with them are often labeled as unintelligent; the worst sin as far as liberals are concerned. However, who is the unintelligent one? Big Government has never worked. It has only brought huge debt which has to be repaid by future generations. Individuals who go into debt face a series of tough measures. Yet Dionne and Dowd seem oblivious to this and advocate the same disastrous path for the government, the end result being tough measures for everyone.  In other words Big Government is a disaster that doesn’t work.

However, Big Government isn’t the only disaster Dionne and Dowd advocate. They want the Catholic Church to turn her back on its 2,000 year old teachings and embrace the Dictatorship of Relativism, so named by Pope Benedict XVI. Dionne and Dowd are happy to embrace dissident Catholics who espouse this sort of thinking. It seems Dionne and Dowd are more comfortable with the views of Marx, Alinsky and Freud than they are with Christ, St Paul, St Thomas Aquinas, St Joan of Arc and Pope Benedict XVI.

Continue reading...

2 Responses to E. J. Dionne & Maureen Dowd Are Playing With A Dangerous Fire

  • Apologies in advance: Top ten reasons to vote dem:

    10. I vote Democrat because I believe oil companies’ profits of 4% on a gallon of gas are obscene but the government taxing the same gallon of gas at 15% isn’t.

    9. I vote Democrat because I believe the government will do a better job of spending the money I earn than I would.

    8. I vote Democrat because Freedom of speech is fine as long as nobody is offended by it.

    7. I vote Democrat because I’m way too irresponsible to own a gun, and I know that my local police are all I need to protect me from murderers and thieves.

    6. I vote Democrat because I believe that people who can’t tell us if it will rain on Friday can tell us that the polar ice caps will melt away in ten years if I don’t start driving a Prius.

    5. I vote Democrat because I’m not concerned about the slaughter of millions of babies through abortion so long as we keep all death row inmates alive.

    4. I vote Democrat because I think illegal aliens have a right to free health care, education, and Social Security benefits.

    3. I vote Democrat because I believe that business should not be allowed to make profits for themselves. They need to break even and give the rest away to the government for redistribution as the democrats see fit.

    2. I vote Democrat because I believe liberal judges need to rewrite the Constitution every few days to suit some fringe kooks who would never get their agendas past the voters.

    1. I vote Democrat because my head is so firmly planted up my @$$ that it is unlikely that I’ll ever have another point of view.

  • T Shaw did you come up with this? If you did something tells me that this might show up across the internet. Who knows old EJ and Maureen might heartily approve, not realizing your satire (well at 2-10.)